Write4U's wobbly world of word salad woo

Write4U said:
Naaah...it is the obligation of the tutor to point to the error and why it is an error.
Click to expand...
No it isn't.
The student does not make up their own ideas based on internet Googling and then demand the tutor correct them.
If the student wants to learn, the student is obliged to start from proper first principles.

And now you've just had you first error pointed out and why it is an error.
 
[QUOTE "Pinball1970, post: 3719847, member: 291587"][QUOTE="Write4U, post: 3719845, member: 261885"
So far you have not shown me anything about the universe other than available science.
What else is there?
Click to expand...
New perspectives, like Tegmark's Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH)

Mathematics: The Beautiful Language of the Universe
JUNE 6, 2015 BY JOSHUA CARROLL
Let us discuss the very nature of the cosmos. What you may find in this discussion is not what you expect. Going into a conversation about the universe as a whole, you would imagine a story full of wondrous events such as stellar collapse, galactic collisions, strange occurrences with particles, and even cataclysmic eruptions of energy. You may be expecting a story stretching the breadth of time as we understand it, starting from the Big Bang and landing you here, your eyes soaking in the photons being emitted from your screen. Of course, the story is grand.
Click to expand...
But there is an additional side to this amazing assortment of events that oftentimes is overlooked; that is until you truly attempt to understand what is going on. Behind all of those fantastic realizations, there is a mechanism at work that allows for us to discover all that you enjoy learning about.
Click to expand...
That mechanism is mathematics, and without it the universe would still be shrouded in darkness.
Click to expand...
In this article, I will attempt to persuade you that math isn’t some arbitrary and sometimes pointless mental task that society makes it out to be, and instead show you that it is a language we use to communicate with the stars.
Click to expand...
https://www.universetoday.com/120681/mathematics-the-beautiful-language-of-the-universe/[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
No, that is not a correction of a factually identified error in content or understanding.
Click to expand...
Thus, you have zero intention of learning anything new.

You take zero responsibility for your own ignorance.
Which is why you are a lost cause - and told so by virtually everyone who tries to engage with you.
 
Folks, this will go nowhere. Write4U can keep this sort of crap going indefinitely, chucking in a tangential internet quote periodically, asking meaningless questions, mangling terminology, etc. It's like Theorist: the game seems to be just to keep a dialogue going, however idiotic - while working in, on the flimsiest pretext, his various idées fixes: Bohm's "implicate order" metaphysics, Tegmark's mathematical universe, anything to do with functions, potentials or differential equations (none of which he has the remotest clue about), microtubules.........
 
Last edited:
exchemist said:
while working in, on the flimsiest pretext, his various idées fixes: Bohm's "implicate order" metaphysics, Tegmark's mathematical universe, microtubules.........
Click to expand...
A rich palette! Why are you complaining?
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
That is not a logical assumption.
Click to expand...
It is not an assumption. You are on record as having been led by the nose to innumerable facts that correct your erroneous notions - not just by members, but by moderators as well - and you are on record as having repeated the same mistakes over and over again.
That is not an assumption; that is your history.
 
DaveC426913 said:
You are on record as having been led by the nose to innumerable facts that correct your erroneous notions - not just by members, but by moderators as well
Click to expand...
No, you are exaggerating the issue. There is a record of ad hominem remarks, but when there was an honest correction or question about a term or phrase, I have always endeavored to explain the context in which I used a particular term.

The record shows that when there was correction directly pertinent to the subject I have thanked the poster and not repeated the original mistake again.

For the rest of what you consider word salad, it is suggestive of lazy thinking and avoiding unpacking the string and looking at the compound description.
 
Write4U said:
No, you are exaggerating the issue. There is a record of ad hominem remarks, but when there was an honest correction or question about a term or phrase, I have always endeavored to explain the context in which I used a particular term.

The record shows that when there was correction directly pertinent to the subject I have thanked the poster and not repeated the original mistake again.

For the rest of what you consider word salad, it is suggestive of lazy thinking and avoiding unpacking the string and looking at the compound description.
Click to expand...
The problem is that, since you are so very ignorant (a fact that can be objectively measured by the sheer number and frequency of words you do not understand and therefore misuse), you are not in a position to know when you are wrong. For the vast majority of times you have been wrong, you are simply unable to see it because of your (objectively measurable) ignorance of the subjects.

The way you can start to see this for yourself is to ask yourself if anyone - anyone - here that you are directly engaging with - agrees with you. No. That's because the rest of us actually do know the science and we all know you don't just have it wrong, you are - as Pauli put it - "not even wrong". You are that far from reality.


I'm not just trying to beat up on you or make you feel bad. You need to stop burning your time and everyone else's with this echo chamber of your own devising. It is damaging to you and the world. All forms of ignorance and misinformation are. Either learn some actual science from the ground up, or abandon it altogether and build birdhouses instead.
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
The problem is that, since you are so very ignorant (a fact that can be objectively measured by the sheer number and frequency of words you do not understand and therefore misuse), you are not in a position to know when you are wrong. For the vast majority of times you have been wrong, you are simply unable to see it because of your (objectively measurable) ignorance of the subjects.
Click to expand...

And exactly what do you have the answers to, when you do not care to try and understand the thrust of my arguments.

You are a perfect example of the old school, rooted in the enigma of Quantum and GR, to which science still does not have an answer, except for "shut up and calculate".

I don't need to calculate the variables in order to understand an equation in principle.
That you don't understand me does not bother me in the least.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
I don't need to calculate the variables in order to understand an equation in principle.
Click to expand...
I'd say we have yet to see you understand any equation, in principle or otherwise. eg. "differential equation" is just Greek to you. Yet you keep employing it as if you understand it, despite being repeatedly told otherwise.

You have a responsibility as a human being to assert things you know about - not things you don't know about. To spread information, not disinformation and ignorance.
To continue to do this is the definition of malicious trolling.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Yet you keep employing it as if you understand it, despite being repeatedly told otherwise.
Click to expand...
And, pray tell what alerts you to the fact that I don't know what a differential equation is?

Quote the instance where I made my terminal error. You must allow me to respond or you are just another elitist trying to impress the crowd.

Tell me. does this guy know what differential equations are? I don't have any problems understanding what he is explaining.

I do not NEED to know the maths. Just what it IS and how it works in general.


DaveC426913 said:
You have a responsibility as a human being to assert things you know about - not things you don't know about. To spread information, not disinformation and ignorance.
To continue to do this is the definition of malicious trolling.
Click to expand...
And it is up to you to prove I am trolling. Just making ad hominem accusations is slander on your part. You may want to be careful with that.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
And exactly what do you have the answers to, when you do not care to try and understand the thrust of my arguments.

You are a perfect example of the old school, rooted in the enigma of Quantum and GR, to which science still does not have an answer, except for "shut up and calculate".

I don't need to calculate the variables in order to understand an equation in principle.
That you don't understand me does not bother me in the least.
Click to expand...


“I see a common denominator between that 2nd Law and SOL, they are both universal constants, no?

Are they both subject to the same rules that govern quantum?”


This is an example of “not even wrong.”

The second law is not a universal constant, it is not even a constant, the statement makes no sense.


“rules that govern quantum”


You do not know the formalism or understand quantum mechanics.


“Bohmian Pilot Wave”


You do not know the formalism or understand quantum mechanics.


“..rooted in the enigma of Quantum and GR, to which science still does not have an answer, except for "shut up and calculate"”


Which answer? Quantum mechanics and General relativity are very well understood and explain a good deal of the universe we live in and make accurate predictions.

“Shut up and calculate” refers to QM not General Relativity, which I am sure you are not familiar with either.


“According to the laws of entropy, does heat flow decay from high frequency wave lengths to low frequency wavelengths?”


Your first question kind of sums this up, there are three major misconceptions just in that one question.


This shows a complete lack of understanding of thermodynamics, Quantum mechanics, general relativity and classical wave theory.


This is what I mean by profound misconceptions.


So you have a choice, you can either pick and mix you tube posts and continue to get mixed up and learn nothing, OR you can get a book on some basics and do some work.

It is far far harder to take the second option.
 
Write4U said:
And it is up to you to prove I am trolling.
Click to expand...
Done.

I don't need to prove it to you. You are, after all, walking like a duck and talking like a duck, and not interested in the fact that everyone (none of whom are ducks) is trying to tell you you're acting like a duck.


Write4U said:
You may want to be careful with that.
Click to expand...
Indeed, I am quite careful with that.
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
I don't need to prove it to you. You are, after all, walking like a duck and talking like a duck, and not interested in the fact that everyone (none of whom are ducks) is trying to tell you you're acting like a duck.
Click to expand...
Make up your mind. A duck is not a troll.

"click"
 
Last edited:
Pinball1970 said:
What does "respond to" mean?
Click to expand...
I'll ignore the ad hominem for now and answer the real question.

Not all differential equations have solutions; nor is the question of existence purely mathematical but if a meaningful physical problem is correctly formulated mathematically as a differential equation, then the mathematical problem should have a solution.

In the best of all possible worlds we know the laws of physics perfectly and can write them as differential equations (or something similar). But we do not live in that world.
Instead we create models of the physical world that may not correspond to the actual laws (due to ignorance or just approximation).
Good models give informative predictions: there is a mapping between what happens in reality and the model that is close to a bijection, so we can use the model to predict physical responses. How close it has to be depends on the application. If the model specifically selects for correctly formulated real problems, they must have real solutions. –
Click to expand...

Bijection
A bijection is a function that is both injective (one-to-one) and surjective (onto). In other words, for every element in the domain, there is a unique element in the codomain that it maps to, and every element in the codomain is mapped to by at least one element in the domain.
Click to expand...
220px-Bijection.svg.png

A bijective function, f: X → Y, where set X is {1, 2, 3, 4} and set Y is {A, B, C, D}. For example, f(1) = D.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bijection#

Multivalued function
In mathematics, a multivalued function, also called multifunction and many-valued function, is a set-valued function with continuity properties that allow considering it locally as an ordinary function.
Click to expand...
.....
Multivalued functions arise also as solutions of differential equations, where the different values are parametrized by initial conditions.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivalued_function
 
Pinball1970 said:
Your first question kind of sums this up, there are three major misconceptions just in that one question.
Click to expand...
W4U said: "According to the laws of entropy, does heat flow decay from high frequency wave lengths to low frequency wavelengths?”
Click to expand...
What do you think I meant to say here? Try to be generous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top