NASA Perseverance lands on mars..

[Deleted member 6273]

ur fucking retarded. weight is defined as the gravitational force on smt.

congrats, u "proved" it urself. dont continue this further, ur responses contradict each other and have no substance.

XD caged heard lmao. Nigga doesn't realise weight depends on mass and gravitational acceleration.

 

[Copeful]

within the standard model of particle physics, which has tied together every interaction and structure across space perfectly, gravity is one of the fundamental forces (so not a composition of diff things). the particle associated w the force is called the graviton. do u want more specificity into the interactions of those particles?

the existence of the graviton has yet to be verified

 

[Mouthbreath]

wait i'm confused, elab on this

what do you want to prove about gravity is the question? that it scales like 1/r^2 as a function of r ,this follows most likely from string theory (I dont know a lot about it as it isnt a fully accepted theory yet, but gravity has the same mathematical form as the electromagnetic force and this force comes very nicely out of the formalism of quantum field theory)

or do you ask about the proportionality constant in front? that constant can as of today not be explained in the sense that it follows from a deeper structure, I think. The same way the masses of particles like the electron cannot be explained, they are just constants that can be measured and seem to have not too much of a meaning (this is the current state of research atleast)

 

[curryslayerordeath]

the existence of the graviton has yet to be verified

problem?

its a particle definition which keeps the model consistent, its existence doesnt need to be shown for the ideas which depend on it to be valid.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

what do you want to prove about gravity is the question? that it scales like 1/r^2 as a function of r ,this follows most likely from string theory (I dont know a lot about it as it isnt a fully accepted theory yet, but gravity has the same mathematical form as the electromagnetic force and this force comes very nicely out of the formalism of quantum field theory)

or do you ask about the proportionality constant in front? that constant can as of today not be explained in the sense that it follows from a deeper structure, I think. The same way the masses of particles like the electron cannot be explained, they are just constants that can be measured and seem to have not too much of a meaning (this is the current state of research atleast)

i just wanted to know if you were saying if gravity can be proven. it seems you're saying that it does exist, but we can't prove it because of the limited research i suppose

 

[Mouthbreath]

i just wanted to know if you were saying if gravity can be proven. it seems you're saying that it does exist, but we can't prove it because of the limited research i suppose

I mean gravity describes the movements of the celestial bodies pretty accurately

and you might come up with different more complicated maths describing the movement of the earth around the sun lets say, but I'm 100percent sure it can then just be simplified to the newtonian physics,

there really is no simpler way of describing it honestly

if you think gravity is not real, you're basically saying mathematics is not real

 

[Deleted member 6273]

cope, just cause they're termed as laws doesn't mean theyre infallible, because physical laws are derived from empirical observations.
there's actually no way to prove gravity, the only "proof" we have of it is observing that it happens. we can establish models that describe what we see and call them LAWS because they hold true in (seemingly) all observable cases, but we can't PROVE them definitively
just semantics though

What can you prove definitively/with absolute certainty in science making sure it holds for ALL cases?

 

[Copeful]

problem?

its a particle definition which keeps the model consistent, its existence doesnt need to be shown for the ideas which depend on it to be valid.

why so hostile phenchod
im not a conspiracy theorist
i believe in gravity

What can you prove definitively/with absolute certainty in science or even generally making sure it holds for ALL cases?

the only absolute science that exists is mathematics, because its built from the ground up and rooted in concepts we've have defined
our understanding of disciplines that deal with the natural world, (i.e physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) is constantly in flux. theories in these fields are formulated and disproven time and time again as we progress in knowledge/technology.

 

[Mouthbreath]

the only absolute science that exists is mathematics, because its built from the ground up and rooted in concepts we've have defined
our understanding of disciplines that deal with the natural world, (i.e physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) is constantly in flux. theories in these fields are formulated and disproven time and time again as we progress in knowledge/technology.

very true

 

[Deleted member 6273]

the only absolute science that exists is mathematics, because its built from the ground up and rooted in concepts we've have defined
our understanding of disciplines that deal with the natural world, (i.e physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) is constantly in flux. theories in these fields are formulated and disproven time and time again as we progress in knowledge/technology.

Yes that's exactly my point. We can never fully and exhaustively prove anything in natural sciences with 100% absolute certainty but we can use the models we have already created and which have been accurate for all cases so far to describe the universe.

@personalityinkwell is basically asking for a full exhaustive proof of the shape of the earth, which as we've established, cannot exist. Even observation has multiple flaws and inconsistencies so viewing it from space isn't exhaustive proof.

This is basically a slippery slope argument and using this logic you should technically be agnostic of everything which cannot be fully and definitely proven, including ALL of the natural sciences

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Yes that's exactly my point. We can never fully and exhaustively prove anything in natural sciences with 100% absolute certainty but we can use the models we have already created and which have been accurate for all cases so far to describe the universe.

@personalityinkwell is basically asking for a full exhaustive proof of the shape of the earth, which as we've established, cannot exist. Even observation has multiple flaws and inconsistencies so viewing it from space isn't exhaustive proof.

This is basically a slippery slope argument and using this logic you should technically be agnostic of everything which cannot be fully and definitely proven, including ALL of the natural sciences

technically you're right, I guess I would say direct observation, while not perfect, would seem more reliable to me. although yeah truthfully even our perception could be flawed

 

[MrGlutton]

everything that @curryslayerordeath have said here is correct.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

you're arguing with someone who's interested in having sexual intercourse with little girls the ages of 9-13

lies, i dont want 9 year olds. teens though sure. (like all men do biolgically speaking)

also btw, you do realize in the bible it says once you hit puberty its ok to have sex right? or do you just conveniently ignore that

OP you keep being evasive on this, must suck that your bible contradicts your brainwashed feminist morals

 

[Copeful]

This is basically a slippery slope argument and using this logic you should technically be agnostic of everything which cannot be fully and definitely proven, including ALL of the natural sciences

this is literally the definition of scientific review though. any scientific theory that has ever come to light undergoes rigorous roundtable review from other accredited researchers that specialize in that particular field, who scrutinize the theory until its deemed valid, but it’s still considered subject to either expansion/falsification - irrespective of how valiantly it might hold up to review. e.g there are still people trying to disprove einstein's theory of relativity, despite it being widely accepted by academia today

it boils down to Occam's razor (otherwise progress would halt) and we overlook this as the theory has stood up to comprehensive review (as far as our understanding at the time of its publishing allows)

 

[Deleted member 10172]

Quite remarkable honestly.

they've successfully landed a robot on that dead planet to detect whatever or not life existed on it.

everything is proceeding as I've foreseen, and at an accelerated rate.

https://looksmax.org/threads/i-will-explain-to-you-what-will-occur-in-the-future.279903/

NASA just has the budget of a large cap company. IMAGINE if they had the military budget? The amount of advancements that we would undergo...

The United States of America is one of the most retarded nations to have ever existed.

 

[MrGlutton]

View attachment 997130

did i just catch you having fun?

 

[Uglybrazilian]

Why do 90% of all dumb negros who question gravity and believe in flat earth with low IQ "arguments" are right wingers?

We need stalin back tbh

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Why do 90% of all dumb negros who question gravity and believe in flat earth with low IQ "arguments" are right wingers?

We need stalin back tbh

define right winger? i'm not really sure if I am one tbh

 

[Copeful]

you're basically saying mathematics is not real

it isn't though, mathematics is a human construct

 

[Uglybrazilian]

this is literally the definition of scientific review though. any scientific theory that has ever come to light undergoes rigorous roundtable review from other accredited researchers that specialize in that particular field, who scrutinize the theory until its deemed valid, but it’s still considered subject to either expansion/falsification - irrespective of how valiantly it might hold up to review. e.g there are still people trying to disprove einstein's theory of relativity, despite it being widely accepted by academia today

it boils down to Occam's razor (otherwise progress would halt) and we overlook this as the theory has stood up to comprehensive review (as far as our understanding at the time of its publishing allows)

Gravity and other theories were and still are subject to several questionings and still managed to stay not falsified, if anyone thinks those theories are wrong it belongs to them the burden of proof

 

[Uglybrazilian]

define right winger? i'm not really sure if I am one tbh

Idk Im not even talking about you

 

[Mouthbreath]

it isn't though, mathematics is a human construct

I dont think so, the concepts are not imo, they were always there if we would have found them or not

 

[Copeful]

Gravity and other theories were and still are subject to several questionings and still managed to stay not falsified, if anyone thinks those theories are wrong it belongs to them the burden of proof

ok but thats a strawman, i never once argued that it wasn’t. the burden of proof obviously lies on those that dissent with the established opinion, yeah
that doesnt detract from the fact that all theories proposed on the natural world are inherently falsifiable by definition, and therefore impossible to prove conclusively. basically what i said here:

cope, just cause they're termed as laws doesn't mean theyre infallible, because physical laws are derived from empirical observations.
there's actually no way to prove gravity, the only "proof" we have of it is observing that it happens. we can establish models that describe what we see and call them LAWS because they hold true in (seemingly) all observable cases, but we can't PROVE them definitively
just semantics though

not trying to argue for flat earth or anything jfl, thats obviously retarded af and a meme

 

[Vitruvian]

All the knowledge in the world will never replace the word of god.

 

[Deleted member 8244]

Good thread, interesting discussions

 

[Incelking]

Why do 90% of all dumb negros who question gravity and believe in flat earth with low IQ "arguments" are right wingers?

We need stalin back tbh

As long as You dont put evolutionism as undeniable truth and science, or neutral genre, thousands of different variations of masculine and femine as science like the leftists retards believe, or that life doesnt Begin at conceptions like imoral arbotists retarted left wing believe, its ok.

Dont turn this into a political and anti-right wing debate for obvious reason: Just relembre that leftists are always throwing science in the garbage with trangenderism bs, no life development in the woomb bs, being obese is not a healthy issues bs.

Its actually the mordern left who hates truth and reasoning more than anything

 

[Uglyandfat]

Space is fake and the earth is flat, we aren't hurtling through space

if i think like this can i become chad?

 

[maxxedfalloutdweller]

Just fucking lol at .me users
While your have disputes on the validity of science chad fucks your oneitis.

 

[Selfahate]

And billions are flushed down the toilet

 

[Uglybrazilian]

As long as You dont put evolutionism as undeniable truth and science, or neutral genre, thousands of different variations of masculine and femine as science like the leftists retards believe, or that life doesnt Begin at conceptions like imoral arbotists retarted left wing believe, its ok.

Dont turn this into a political and anti-right wing debate for obvious reason: Just relembre that leftists are always throwing science in the garbage with trangenderism bs, no life development in the woomb bs, being obese is not a healthy issues bs.

Its actually the mordern left who hates truth and reasoning more than anything

The modern right hates science and truth just as much as the modern "left", which is not surprising since the modern left is actually philosophicaly closer to the right than to materialism

 

[Incelking]

The modern right hates science and truth just as much as the modern "left", which is not surprising since the modern left is actually philosophicaly closer to the right than to materialism

There's a quite striking difference here. The whole flat earth talk is absolutely irrelevante for the the right and only represents a tiny minority that at the end of day, even people on the right makes Fun of.

On the contrary, the insanity of denying Self evident and observanle biologicaly facts is part of the Very leftist agenda, and the political leadership on the left, regardless If radical (re)progressiva or not, take all advantage of It because of the end of the day they want vote and Power

 

[Copeful]

bumo, gravity doesn’t exist IMO
the standard model is riddled with holes

 

[Deleted member 4612]

bumo, gravity doesn’t exist IMO
the standard model is riddled with holes

srs or just trolling?

 

[Copeful]

srs or just trolling?

you can’t just construct a new elementary particle (the graviton) even though it might maintain the standard model in hypothetical scenarios

also, the standard model hasn’t been unified with Einstein’s theory of general relativity which is problematic as well

it’s just accepted as it is because we haven’t figured out how to unify them, but there could very well exist an alternative model altogether

 

[Copeful]

gravity is cope

 

[Deleted member 4612]

gravity is cope

what do you think exists then? you're not a flat earther so what force brings everything down to earth

 

[Copeful]

what do you think exists then? you're not a flat earther so what force brings everything down to earth

im not a theoretical physicist so idk tbh

 

[Copeful]

everything that @curryslayerordeath have said here is correct.

hypergamy is a myth and so is gravity

 

[MrGlutton]

hypergamy is a myth and so is gravity

yea because im going to take your word on it

 

[Lasko123]

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Quite remarkable honestly.

they've successfully landed a robot on that dead planet to detect whatever or not life existed on it.

everything is proceeding as I've foreseen, and at an accelerated rate.

https://looksmax.org/threads/i-will-explain-to-you-what-will-occur-in-the-future.279903/

NASA just has the budget of a large cap company. IMAGINE if they had the military budget? The amount of advancements that we would undergo...

The United States of America is one of the most retarded nations to have ever existed.

Jfl at your 'going to space cope' Do I need to remind you all the subhumans who signed for mars one?

 

[Copeful]

yea because im going to take your word on it

you should tbh
i was in a (competitive) physics internship in hs so i know what im talking about