Nothing is because of 'modern physics' and I mean nothing at all

No need to get upset, I was merely curious. You know, the heart of science. Besides, I know two languages, English and Bad English.

 

Saturnia?

 

Progressive ideology incorporates science as one of its foundations, but I'm not sure what you mean by "no clue about any reality around them". Can you perhaps elucidate?

 

I expected you to crawl into a hole out of shame for your ignorance.

Thereby implying that Lauterbur built an MRI machine before there was a theory of how to do it. I showed that the theory behind his invention preceded it by 20 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Lauterbur

You asked questions? Oh, you mean "Eggs or chicken?"

1. Actually it shows how nonsensical your post was.
2. Oh, I see. You were not being serious. You were just joking. Ha Ha.
3. Get out you big red magic marker.

I entered the conversation when you posted nonsense about MRI. I'll let others take you to the woodshed about CO2.

None were Christian Fundamentalists. Einstein said Christianity was childish. Bohr was not particularly interested in religion.

Golly gee. I thought it was based on advanced mathematics.

The above is so incoherent that it is impossible to ask any questions.

 

Your wording implies that I said that they were Christian Fundamentalists. Since I did not say anything even close to such a meaningless statement you just prove that you lie as usual, that you are not interested in any intelligent discourse but only in imposing your fanatical religious beliefs on others by all means possible, by lies, by perversion, by anything which comes handy, and I can bet this is the only content of all your 2800 posts.

No text, as 2 were already given here - one by me, one by you, no red marker can even scratch the forged surface of your fanatical religious belief that QM was based on advanced mathematics and not on experiment and building apparatuses ( I call them machines.)

If 100% of scientists of the world refuse, deflect, ignore any literate experiment AND a machine demonstrating CO2 trapping, forcing back, reflecting back ( what an illiteracy in basics of basics!) heat, then 100% of scientists are not different from you.


Fortunately such 100% or 97% exist only in your religious, fanatical mind.

 

I don’t mind to count them as two as long as you know when and where to use which one.


I mean you can use Bad English with me, but don’t try it with my lady, she will make you cry. She is an M. D., an Oncologist, speaks to Death every day.

 

Science is based on a scientific method.

Progressives impose only their scientific method shutting up any opposing voice.

Progressive ideology is no different from fascism, dictatorship, totalitarianism.

Not even a slight difference.

 

The trolling OP did not refer to this article, did it?

Please notice that you again run away from any questions.

Did you notice that your article is pure trolling?

Did you notice that French, Polish and Russians don’t know what modern physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_physics is, while their contribution to physics is quite noticeable?

I already pointed that Einstein and Bohr used the same method as Newton. As long as methodology remains the same physics remains the same.

Did I pointed to you or to somebody else that Einstein revoked Newton’s methodology every second day of his life?

Did I point that Einstein argued that his theory was right because it was in full compliance with Newton’s theory?

Do you know that the OP is right in the meaning that the Theory of relativity was published a few months before Einstein and in French and it was not by Einstein?


As long as physics follows the methodology set up by Newton and followed by Einstein (not always) and by Ernest Rutherford, 1st Baron Rutherford of Nelson, and by Lord Kelvin and by Niels Bohr and by all other, with no exclusion, givers of laws and theories of physics it remains the same physics, beautiful and exciting.

When it follows the methodology set up by Sir Karl Raimund Pooper, an Austrian-British philosopher and professor followed by Carl Sagan and other progressives, it is not physics, but an ugly and revolting perversion of it. I am sorry that this is all you have known and have been brainwashed into, into ugliness and perversion.

 

....

 

I certainly didn't mean for my wikipedia link to come across as trolling. The term "modern physics" was material to the theme of this thread. I felt it might help if we all worked with a common definition. And I honestly didn't know that this term is not as ubiquitous in France, Poland, and Russia as it is here in the United States. Though, in my defense, this is a predominantly English speaking forum so...

As for the rest of your post I'm choosing to ignore it because it has little relevance to this thread. The OP claimed that "modern physics" is a big joke, retarded, and did not contribute to new technologies. That is what we're debating here.

 

Taught us that gay bath houses need to be fabulous?

 

I think this actually tops all the Trump hate as dumbest thread of the year.

 

Not a meaningless statement at all. Why did you bother to bring god into the discussion in the first place. You did it for the same reason that people like you often do, to show that religion and science are compatible. I agree they are, to a certain extent. However, they are incompatible when a person let's his religious views stand in the way of science.

Actually, you seem to want to ignore the comments in my previous posts. You know, the one where I corrected your knowledge of which came first: the MRI machine or the MRI theory. When you posted that the machine was developed before the theory were you lying or just ignorant?

I already showed that the theory for the MRI predated its invention by twenty years.

You must know that 1952 came before 1970. You should know what "scientific principle" means (the theory). So now, ignorance is not an excuse you can use. That leaves only lying on your part.

I also noted that you use a theme familiar to me and to all people who discuss things with fundies. When boxed in, you accuse people who believe in science of things like "imposing fanatical religious beliefs" on the fundies. Obviously you don't understand the meaning of the words "impose" and "religious". Your knowledge of English is on a par with your knowledge of science.

 

There are ways to quickly check if a wiki article is trolling. One of the ways to see what languages it is translated to. You can also use google translate to see what other languages think about the subject.

Missing French, Polish and Russian raised red flags, - trolling.

I may put you on ignore list if you keep on ignoring my points subject after subject, topic after topic.

One cannot argue whether "modern physics" is a big joke, retarded or it is not unless one defines "modern physics" and defines its difference from the old fashioned physics.

So I did.

So you ignored.

 

Meaningless or not, the point was that I did not make such a statement and your answer implied that I did.

And again you answer implies that I made points I did not.

You keep on pushing lies.

I pointed that QM was founded in the old fashioned way, by all believers in God, therefore it could not be any special, “modern” physics.

The old fashioned way = by all believers in God. As you know all physics was founded and developed by Xns when there was no question if religion and science were compatible and what could stay on the way of another.

When it was obvious that only faulty theology could stay on the way of science and so only faulty science could stay on the way of theology.

The was no such q-n because Xn theologian Isaac Newton had explained the place of God in physics in his book “Mathematical principals of physics” aka “Classical mechanics” aka “Universal laws of gravitation.”

In which he also set the scientific method.

The one ignored by the “modern” physics.

You lie again. I pointed 3 times it was not my knowledge but you were putting one wiki article against another and thus you better check if you were not confused.

You are confusing MRI machine theory and NMR theory.

Both started from apparatuses/machines and experiments; which makes QM to be physics aka old fashioned experimental philosophy in its foundation, while making CO2 warming earth a total fake, a “modern” science, a fraud.

You lie and insult, pushing your belief in what you think is science on others.

Which does not make you any different from

 

Uh huh. They took a bunch of metal and lasers and nuts and bolts and built an MRI machine with no ideas of the theoretical concepts. Uh huh. That's the same argument fundies usually laugh at:

I didn't pit one wiki article against another. You carefully extracted a small portion that supported your argument: The MRI machine was developed; two years later they published a paper on it.


You carefully chose to ignore that the theory behind it was published twenty years earlier.

​

Actually, that is exactly what you have been doing. Selective cutting and pasting is intentional lying.



I guess I'm going to be the next one you put on your ignore list. You do that when you can't compete. That's OK. I understand. Others have done so for the same reasons. I suppose when you have no one left to discuss your silly views with, you'll just move on to another forum and start over. May I suggest:
https://www.christianforums.com/

 

I am not familiar with details of the propositions of ID, but I am sure that you are attacking a strawman as you’re doing with my points.

You have to.

You live by lies and deception.

And you are lying again, - the article does not say a paper on it, but it says the theory behind it.

Can you make a sentence free of lying and deception?

And you argued with another wiki article from which you carefully extracted a small portion that you thought supported your argument.

But you own article is saying about experiments and apparatus, drawing of a model which came first.

That’s why I said that even if I bold these words in red they will not leave a trace on the forged surface of a mind of a religious fanatic.

Not the theory behind it (MRI machine) but the NMR theory which its turn was made from experiments and its own machine. I can point to this fact 5, 10 times, but you still will be trying to deceit the public.

Because you build your life on lies and deceptions.

 

Wait...so you think the article itself is trolling? I thought you were saying I was trolling you by posting the think. Either way, it makes no sense. Wikipedia and its contributors didn't invent the term if that's what you're implying. "modern physics" has been around for as long as I remember which predates Wikipedia by a lot. It's really common vernacular in the academic community here in the United States. So common, in fact, that it's taken as a given that everyone knows it. I have no idea to what degree it's used in other cultures so I'll take your word for it. I am surprised though because it's just the counterpart to "classical physics" and I know other cultures use that terminology so it's hard to believe they wouldn't understand "modern physics", but whatever. Regardless, most of us knew what the OP was saying and that's why we're responding with demonstrable examples of technologies that were made possible by quantum mechanics and special/general relativity.

I don't know what to tell you. Do what you feel is right. I'm just trying to keep the thread on topic. If you think debating who developed special/general relatively or quantum mechanics is worthwhile then by all means post a new thread. Or if you think it's material to this thread let us know why and how. Maybe I'm the only one that sees little relevance. I could be wrong.

Like I said I didn't define the term. Neither did you. And it doesn't count if you just now made one up on your own. It's been around for a long time. Don't believe me? Just google for it. There are college text books that are title as such and there are even academic journals that only allow submissions categorized as "modern physics". I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the definition. I pointed you to Wikipedia because that's what I thought you preferred.

 

What are you talking about? First, that's debatable that everyone who contributed to QM believed in God (which is false). Second, who cares? That doesn't change the fact that almost everyone accepts that "modern physics" = QM and Relativity. It's that simple. It's just a definition. One which happens to be widely accepted.

No, we aren't. Paul Lauterbur was an expert on nuclear magnetic resonance. He exploited his knowledge of it to create the MRI. Don't believe me? Google for it!

But, it's not just the MRI that was born out of modern physics. It's so much more. GPS happens to be one of the better examples because it required a full understanding of QM (because of atomic clocks), special relativity (because of the timing anomalies due to the satellites speed), and general relativity (because of the timing anomalies due to Earth's gravity).

 

Obviously you do not understand the difference between an analogy and a strawman argument. You should Google the two terms. Then, if you are still confused, let me know and I'll try to help.


(my emphases)

Are you saying that religious fanatics live their lives by lies and deceptions? I might agree with that.

But, how did come to believe that I'm religious? I'm not. I'm an atheist. I thought that was quite clear from my many posts.

 

Your VERY wrong about that.

I was at MIT and I can tell you there are practical applications abound in many a U.S. Military Black Program.

I personally developed a Multiversal Model as the Many Worlds Model was far too limited to account for many aspects of Quantum Mechanics nor did the Many Worlds Model account for Dark Matter and Dark Energy as well as the NUMERICS and YES this is a new word....of Virtual Quark/Antiquark pairings.

If you are versed in Multiversal Polymorphic Quadratic Algebraic Equations that have lead us to the New Form Calculus which you would first have to learn and understand the New Forms Syntax and Symbology before you could begin to understand it....send me a PM.

AA

 

We must all surely admit that there's a lot of BS in 'space physics' though?

 

It is absolutely clear that I never suggested that MRI was invented mindlessly.

And it is absolutely clear that you cannot stop lying.

The name or your religion, things you blindly believe in do not matter.

You confess and profess your belief in science, while you have never done it, have nave cooked in that kitchen and have no clue about it.

It is as pathological as to measure life by a belief in carpentry, or literature or figure skating; and especially when the believer has never built a house or wrote a book .

You have no clue about the process of warming, the term climate, you wouldn’t recognize laws of Thermodynamics, yet you believe in AGW.

 

The results of googling were submitted and referred to, for a case if you missed.

“Exploited his knowledge” is no different from ecco’s “a paper on it “ instead of theory on it”.

You exercise linguistic, not physics.

I merely point that physics is an experiment and a machine, it is experimental philosophy by definition.

And MRI and QM in its foundation are no exclusion.

No experiment, no machine mean no physics; whether you call it modern or postmodern, it means a fake science.

Like climate science is all fake.

 

I believe everything you said is true.

I have been pointing that it is all about culture; or rather counter-culture, it has nothing to do to physics, - it is pure trolling, whether it is done by wiki authors or by the academic community here in the United States.

If you bothered to read Einstein’s “Theory of Relativity” 1925 (?) you would see that Einstein does not see the TOR as a counterpart to classical mechanics.

Not in any way or measure.

Understand?

Yes?

No?

Modern physics is as fake as climate science is.

In the part you ignored I explained why.

If you never believe me it is OK.

If you always ignore things I say it is OK.

But when speaking about special/general relatively you and the academic community don’t believe and ignore Einstein, in the same way as when speaking about the 2nd law you and the academic community don’t believe and ignore Kelvin, should not I put you and the academic community on ignore list?