09 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_general_relativity
That only helps in a motionless system, i.e., the system itself is not moving.
The specific question is: where in the universe will the earth be, or has it been?
Not in relation to the sun, but in relation to the broader room, the universe.
09 Jul 17
6 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
That only helps in a motionless system, i.e., the system itself is not moving.
The specific question is: where in the universe will the earth be, or has it been?
Not in relation to the sun, but in relation to the broader room, the universe.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit
That only helps in a motionless system, i.e., the system itself is not moving.
NO, it sensibly defines the orbit of the Earth + ALL systems are moving relative to something so there isn't such thing as a "motionless system" in the absolute sense, only a RELATIVE sense because you must specify what thing the "motionless system" is "motionless" relative to.
The specific question is: where in the universe will the earth be, or has it been?
The word "where" in that question makes no sense unless it means "where" in relation to some other arbitrary chosen thing (such as the Sun, which would seem to be the most sensible choice) or arbitrary chosen point in space.
Not in relation to the sun, but in relation to the broader room, the universe.
you think the room itself (as a whole) in the universe has a position? Position in relation to the position of what other object or point in space other than the room itself in the universe? NO, the universe and/or the room itself (as a whole) within it doesn't have a position. There isn't such thing as a positional relation to "the broader room, the universe"; you make no sense.
Perhaps your misconception is that you think the space itself (what you refer to the "room" ) in universe as a whole is stationary! The space itself in universe as a whole is neither stationary nor moving because position and motion of it is undefined, which is just another way of saying it doesn't have the attribute of being either 'stationary' or being in 'motion'; stationary or in motion relative to what? (and perhaps another issue is how would we 'know' whether it was 'moving' or 'stationary'! )
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by humyThis is why I don't answer Freaky's questions. If he doesn't like the help, he's starting to act like he knows more.
no, I can answer it; but you are either not interested or cannot understand.
Freaky knows the answer already. He just likes to troll.
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by humy[b] Originally posted by KazetNagorra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_orbit
That only helps in a motionless system, i.e., the system itself is not moving.
NO, it sensibly defines the orbit of the Earth + ALL systems are moving relative to something so there isn't such thing as a "motionless system" in the absolute ...[text shortened]... at? (and perhaps another issue is how would we 'know' whether it was 'moving' or 'stationary'! )[/b]You’re making it harder than it has to be with a result of confusing yourself.
I have no misconception related to the universe; how I characterized it makes logical sense.
It can be likened to a room in the sense that it, like a room, creates a space with borders.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends.
Anything which exists must occupy space within the room.
Why?
Because it is there.
If the earth is in one spot consistent with its mass, it cannot be in a completely different spot without leaving its initial spot first.
The question put to you is: how would we know where the moon is going to be in three days under the following conditions.
1. The moon is revolving around the earth at 2,288 MPH
2. The earth is revolving around the sun at 67,000 MPH
3. The sun is moving through the universe at 450,000 MPH
What makes the proposition problematic is how that speed is determined, since nothing is fixed… well, except for the universe itself.
But if there is no reference point--- no line of scrimmage, no hash marks denoting yardage, no out of bounds or etc.--- we cannot know where we are or where we are going to be.
Launching a rocket to the moon sounds like the equivalent of the quarterback telling the receiver “Go long” and yet we have no idea where “long” is right now, let alone where it is going to be in three days.
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou don't believe any of that since you are convinced that 1 Gravity doesn't exist, 2 Earth is flat, 3 the sun is a few thousand miles above Earth and small and 4 the moon is self illuminated.
You’re making it harder than it has to be with a result of confusing yourself.
I have no misconception related to the universe; how I characterized it makes logical sense.
It can be likened to a room in the sense that it, like a room, creates a space with borders.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends. ...[text shortened]... yet we have no idea where “long” is right now, let alone where it is going to be in three days.
So why are you bringing up all this in the first place?
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt is obvious to everyone but you, that you are the confused one.
You’re making it harder than it has to be with a result of confusing yourself.
I have no misconception related to the universe;
You clearly have a number of misconceptions.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends.
No, it doesn't end, simply or otherwise. The universe is endless.
If the earth is in one spot consistent with its mass, it cannot be in a completely different spot without leaving its initial spot first.
And your OP, asks how we define such a spot, and, as I pointed out, all coordinate systems are relative.
3. The sun is moving through the universe at 450,000 MPH
Wrong.
My guess is you looked that up and got a figure for how fast it is moving through the galaxy (relative to the galaxy).
What makes the proposition problematic is how that speed is determined, since nothing is fixed… well, except for the universe itself.
No, the 'universe itself' is not fixed.
But if there is no reference point--- no line of scrimmage, no hash marks denoting yardage, no out of bounds or etc.--- we cannot know where we are or where we are going to be.
But we can tell where we will be relative to other things, which is all we actually need to know.
Launching a rocket to the moon sounds like the equivalent of the quarterback telling the receiver “Go long” and yet we have no idea where “long” is right now, let alone where it is going to be in three days.
The receiver only needs to know where the quarterback is, and where and when he will throw the ball. Where the quarterback is relative to the moon is irrelevant for the catch.
It is clear that not only do you believe the earth is flat and reject Newtons understanding of gravity, but you reject Newtons laws of motion too.
One think is for sure, the US education system sucks.
09 Jul 17
3 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You’re making it harder than it has to be with a result of confusing yourself.
I have no misconception related to the universe; how I characterized it makes logical sense.
It can be likened to a room in the sense that it, like a room, creates a space with borders.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends. ...[text shortened]... yet we have no idea where “long” is right now, let alone where it is going to be in three days.
It can be likened to a room in the sense that it, like a room, creates a space with borders.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends.
"ends" 'where'? In what way? You make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And how do you know that the universe isn't infinite in size? Modern science certainly by far doesn't rule that possibility out.
Anything which exists must occupy space within the room.
Why?
Errr ... NOBODY disputes the extreme obvious that if something exists in the universe then it exists in space and everyone can see why that is true with no problem so that's a pretty stupid question.
What makes the proposition problematic is how that speed is determined, since nothing is fixed…
Speed can be determined by certain astronomical observations and applying the laws of physics and planetary motion by making the required maths calculations; no problem. The speed of each object is partly determined by the arbitrary choice of thing to be used as the 'fixed' point of reference.
well, except for the universe itself.
So you think the universe itself has or could have a speed!? NO, it doesn't because that makes absolutely no sense because all speed is relative.
But if there is no reference point--- no line of scrimmage, no hash marks denoting yardage, no out of bounds or etc.--- we cannot know where we are or where we are going to be.
right, but we DO have reference points. We see them every day. So no problem to solve here.
Launching a rocket to the moon sounds like the equivalent of the quarterback telling the receiver “Go long” and yet we have no idea where “long” is right now, let alone where it is going to be in three days.
No, nothing like it, because the scientists that did the necessary calculations to guide the first man to the Moon DID come to know where the Earth and the Moon would be days ahead else he would have been sent off to god knows where.
Just carious; do you really literally believe the Earth is flat as in, if you travel too far in one direction on its surface, you would fall off its 'edge'?
Also, do you believe the Sun orbits around the Earth rather than the Earth orbiting around the Sun?
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt is NOT stated in the OP.
It is NOT stated in the OP.
[b]And that sun is moving all the time, so that won't work, will it.
Did you read my post, or you really that stupid?
You still consider yourself moderator of the forum?
Tsk-tsk.
No, I still consider some of your topics to be NOT science related and I suggest taking them to the spirituality forum where delus ...[text shortened]... only reason you are here is you embarrassed yourself in the debates forum and ran away in shame.[/b]
Sure it is.
Did you read my post, or you really that stupid?
Your post offered nothing in the way of an answer.
Define "that," if you're able.
No, I still consider some of your topics to be NOT science related and I suggest taking them to the spirituality forum where delusional nonsense is usually discussed.
Considering how I've started no more than two posts on this forum, your use of "some" seems a bit excessive.
Why don't you give it another whack.
And, for clarity's sake, you didn't "suggest" posting in Spirituality:
02 Jul '17 12:34 twhitehead
Take it to debates or spirituality.
The only reason you are here is you embarrassed yourself in the debates forum and ran away in shame.
So you fancy yourself the forum moderator AND a mind-reader!
Novel!
Debates is a cesspool of people such as yourself: long on insult and short on insight.
Keep up the latter and find yourself being ignored even more than you currently are on all forums.
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt is obvious to everyone but you, that you are the confused one.
It is obvious to everyone but you, that you are the confused one.
[b]I have no misconception related to the universe;
You clearly have a number of misconceptions.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends.
No, it doesn't end, simply or otherwise. The universe is endless.
If the eart ...[text shortened]... ut you reject Newtons laws of motion too.
One think is for sure, the US education system sucks.
The first line of attack with intellectual wannabes is this very line of thinking.
When faced with something they cannot answer because they do not know and they cannot be bothered to ferret it out for themselves, small minds avoid responding to the question and focus their attack on the person.
Just answer the question or move on.
Pretty simple, or at least it should be.
You clearly have a number of misconceptions.
And you're here to clear up exactly none of them.
No, it doesn't end, simply or otherwise. The universe is endless.
Oops.
ESA (you've heard of them, I assume) interviewed Astrophysicist Joseph Silk:
ESA: Is the Universe finite or infinite?
Joseph Silk:
We don't know. The expanding Universe theory says that the Universe could expand forever [that corresponds to a 'flat' Universe]. And that is probably the model of the Universe that we feel closest to now. But it could also be finite, because it could be that the Universe has a very large volume now, but finite, and that that volume will increase, so only in the infinite future will it actually be infinite.
ESA:
It sounds like a game of words, is it?
Joseph Silk:
No. We do not know whether the Universe is finite or not....
Darn.
Wish I was as wicked smaht as you, and not "that" stupid like me.
Wrong.
My guess is you looked that up and got a figure for how fast it is moving through the galaxy (relative to the galaxy).
A driver of a car is pulled over for going 55 MPH on a 35 MPH dirt road.
Is he going 55 only on the dirt road, or is he also going 55 in the county, the state and the country in which he is driving?
No, the 'universe itself' is not fixed.
How the f*** would you know?
But we can tell where we will be relative to other things, which is all we actually need to know.
And these "other things"... what are they, exactly?
The receiver only needs to know where the quarterback is, and where and when he will throw the ball. Where the quarterback is relative to the moon is irrelevant for the catch.
That's about as ass backwards as you can get.
The analogy was:
Pretend you're the quarterback of a football team.
which was further fleshed out with:
...how do you, as the quarterback, time your pass to hit the receiver, i.e., the moon, when you have no idea where in the hell that receiver is going to be?
One think is for sure, the US education system sucks.
What that has to do with any of this is anybody's guess.
The "education system" of the world sucks.
It's nothing more than indoctrination and move along.
They don't teach kids to ask questions any more, nor do they teach them how to construct a structured framework of thought to help them answer the questions.
Your dodge-weave-and-insult is pretty much the pinnacle example of what is wrong with the system.
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by humy"ends" 'where'? In what way? You make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And how do you know that the universe isn't infinite in size? Modern science certainly by far doesn't rule that possibility out.It can be likened to a room in the sense that it, like a room, creates a space with borders.
This room in view, however, has no walls, floors or ceilings, but rather, it simply ends.
"ends" 'where'? In what way? You make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And how do you know that the universe isn't infinite in size? Modern science certainly ...[text shortened]... o, do you believe the Sun orbits around the Earth rather than the Earth orbiting around the Sun?
What makes no sense whatsoever is arguing with the likes of you with your continued confusion of simple concepts.
We have no idea if the universe ends or if it doesn't.
From all appearances, it appears to end.
Speed can be determined by certain astronomical observations and applying the laws of physics and planetary motion by making the required maths calculations; no problem. The speed of each object is partly determined by the arbitrary choice of thing to be used as the 'fixed' point of reference.
Sure.
That's why we calculate the speed of the solar system in a frame of rest if the other stars were all standing still.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qsolsysspeed.html
So you think the universe itself has or could have a speed!? NO, it doesn't because that makes absolutely no sense because all speed is relative.
Remember what I said before about you confusing simple concepts?
This is one of them, but I found the solution.
You're not reading what is written.
I said the only thing that isn't moving its position is the universe, not that the universe has a speed.
You can expand through nothing, but you cannot move through nothing.
right, but we DO have reference points. We see them every day. So no problem to solve here.
And yet you're having tremendous problems in explaining it.
No, nothing like it, because the scientists that did the necessary calculations to guide the first man to the Moon DID come to know where the Earth and the Moon would be days ahead else he would have been sent off to god knows where.
No, nothing like it... except when it is exactly like it.
I just said if they don't know where the moon is going to be, it will be the same as throwing the ball without knowing where it will land and yet you say it's nothing like that... but then you say "else he would have been sent off to god knows where,' or, as stated, exactly what I said in the first place.
Read twice if it helps.
Just carious; do you really literally believe the Earth is flat
So far so good...
as in, if you travel too far in one direction on its surface, you would fall off its 'edge'?
Darn it.
Good start, though!
Also, do you believe the Sun orbits around the Earth rather than the Earth orbiting around the Sun?
Yep.
You're two for three.
Not quite 67%, but it really doesn't matter: I'll give you the D.
09 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThere really are only three possibilities. Either you are confused, or everyone else in the world, scientists and all are confused, or everyone is confused. I think that for you to argue that you are the only sane one, demonstrates your massive ego, but doesn't demonstrate your sanity.
The first line of attack with intellectual wannabes is this very line of thinking.tem.
When faced with something they cannot answer ..
Speak for yourself. You just don't like the answers.
... small minds avoid responding to the question ...
Again with the oversized ego.
Just answer the question or move on.
Answered ages ago in the very first reply to your OP.
Pretty simple, or at least it should be.
So I thought, but you seem to be having trouble with the basics.
ESA (you've heard of them, I assume) interviewed Astrophysicist Joseph Silk:
ESA: Is the Universe finite or infinite?
Joseph Silk:
We don't know. The expanding Universe theory says that the Universe could expand forever [that corresponds to a 'flat' Universe]. And that is probably the model of the Universe that we feel closest to now. But it could also be finite, because it could be that the Universe has a very large volume now, but finite, and that that volume will increase, so only in the infinite future will it actually be infinite.
It sounds like a game of words, is it?
Joseph Silk:
No. We do not know whether the Universe is finite or not....
Darn.
Wish I was as wicked smaht as you, and not "that" stupid like me.
Glad you know you recognize my wisdom. Its such a pity you couldn't even understand what you quoted.
He didn't say anything to contradict what I said, contrary to what your sarcasm attempts to imply. Your resort to sarcasm however is noted and is most likely because you realise you could be wrong, so you are stabbing in the dark.
A driver of a car is pulled over for going 55 MPH on a 35 MPH dirt road.
Is he going 55 only on the dirt road, or is he also going 55 in the county, the state and the country in which he is driving?
Do you have a point?
How the f*** would you know?
Getting upset are we?
And these "other things"... what are they, exactly?
Take your meds.
That's about as ass backwards as you can get.
Or you are drunk? Or delusional? Either way, you clearly are having great difficulty processing anything that goes against your world view.
What that has to do with any of this is anybody's guess.
The "education system" of the world sucks.
Well I fully admit that most people in Zambia get a very poor education, but we are a poor nation. But I understood the basic laws of motion in high school.
It's nothing more than indoctrination and move along.
Enough said. Go back to spirituality where angels can sing you to sleep. This is the science forum where we discuss reality.
09 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSeriously. Put down your ego for a minute and go read a few wikipedia pages on the subject. You don't even understand the basics. I suggest looking up Galaxy for a start.
We have no idea if the universe ends or if it doesn't.
From all appearances, it appears to end.
That's why we calculate the speed of the solar system in a frame of rest if the other stars were all standing still.