[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
Where does it go at night, though? It can't go under the (flat) Earth, because there's turtles in the way.
It's electric bro, god just turns it off and then back on in the morning. He's like a sky lighthouse keeper.
Science is not yet ready for such questions.
What is an experiment?
You cannot. They analyse spectra from the Sun and hence measure temperatures. The laws of thermodynamics forbid a hotter corona. Hannes Alfven's magnetic wave so-called theory explains why. But it can never be proven experimentally.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
An experiment tests a hypothesis.
A hypothesis predicts the outcome of an experiment. It predicts what will happen to the dependent variable in the event of a change in the independent variable.
Which answers the question of the 3 components of the experiment. The independent variable we change and manipulate to cause a change in the dependent variable, which we measure. The control variables ensure no other factor besides the independent variable causes the change.
What is overlooked consistently and never mentioned in any discussion I have ever come across is that Newton's inverse sq law is already assumed to be correct prior to the Cavendish test. The test does not confirm its correctness, it just uses the law to derive earth density and hence G.
In an experiment the relation searched for is derived empirically and the constant found from say a derived linear relationship.
You also need earth radius but that is somewhat secondary here.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
The three essential parts of an experiment are:
Independent variable: The part of the experiment that the scientist changes or manipulates.
Dependent variable: The outcome or result that is measured.
Experimental units: The subjects or items being tested.
(Copilot Summary)
What is science?
https://answersingenesis.org/search/?q=s...
Science means “knowledge” and refers to a process by which we learn about the natural world. There are two different kinds of science: observational and historical. Historical science deals with the past and is not directly testable or observable, so it must be interpreted according to your worldview.
The three essential parts of an experiment are:
Independent variable: The part of the experiment that the scientist changes or manipulates.
Dependent variable: The outcome or result that is measured.
Experimental units: The subjects or items being tested.
(Copilot Summary)
ESSENTIAL.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
What is science?
https://answersingenesis.org/search/?q=s...
Science means “knowledge” and refers to a process by which we learn about the natural world. There are two different kinds of science: observational and historical. Historical science deals with the past and is not directly testable or observable, so it must be interpreted according to your worldview.
I would further state that cause and effect relationships are found only through experiment. Observations alone cannot predict cause and effect relationships.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
I would further state that cause and effect relationships are found only through experiment. Observations alone cannot predict cause and effect relationships.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Yet you appear to have no problem with theories that cannot, by your own admission, be proven experimentally, but do support your kooky beliefs. Odd.
Anyway, observations can of course provide strong evidence of relationships, aka physical laws. You don't need an independent variable you control yourself when you can make thousands of observations where the universe controls it for you (e.g. orbital period being related to the distance between celestial bodies and their respective masses). Why you seem to think that it matters whether you yourself set up a gravitationally bound system and observed its behaviour as opposed to observing the behaviour of thousands of pre-existing gravitationally bound systems with differing values for the variables you would have controlled for is beyond me.
An experiment tests a hypothesis.A hypothesis predicts the outcome of an experiment. It predicts what will happen to the dependent variable in the event of a change in the independent variable.Which answers the question of the 3 components of the experiment. The independent variable we change and manipulate to cause a change in the dependent variable, which we measure. The cont
A quick google search for "how has universal gravity been verified experimentally" provides plenty of information on the subject matter for those interested. Suffice to say, Brofessor Billy's synopsis here is less than complete and less than accurate.
And how have you experimentally verified your theories of terrestrial gravity with those parallel field lines, Brofessor?
Firstly, let's hear how you measured the direction of gravity. Secondly, relative to what. Thirdly, where you placed your detectors, considering that 1km on a spherical Earth's surface is only about 32 arcseconds of angle (about 1/100th of a degree).
You cannot. They analyse spectra from the Sun and hence measure temperatures. The laws of thermodynamics forbid a hotter corona. Hannes Alfven's magnetic wave so-called theory explains why. But it can never be proven experimentally.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Strange you're proclaiming things true with no experimental backup. Explains why you might be condused about 9/11.
A quick google search for "how has universal gravity been verified experimentally" provides plenty of information on the subject matter for those interested. Suffice to say, Brofessor Billy's synopsis here is less than complete and less than accurate.
And how have you experimentally verified your theories of terrestrial gravity with those parallel field lines, Brofessor?
Yeah keep frantically googling for answers.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
You wanna discuss 9/11 again? First show you have the scientific acumen of a 10 year old, or better.
Name the 3 constituent parts of an experiment.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
I was on your side for a while, but now even I find you tiresome.
Please define your terms as you see fit and then give us your arguments.
Thank you!
Firstly, let's hear how you measured the direction of gravity. Secondly, relative to what. Thirdly, where you placed your detectors, considering that 1km on a spherical Earth's surface is only about 32 arcseconds of angle (about 1/100th of a degree).
Light gates or similar. Vector is perpendicular to the ground, which is level. All acceleration vectors are parallel for any and all construction projects, i.e. anything useful. No deviation for any bridge, building, canal (generally quite long) etc. No deviation from parallel field lines. It is a uniform field.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Light gates or similar. Vector is perpendicular to the ground, which is level. All acceleration vectors are parallel for any and all construction projects, i.e. anything useful. No deviation for any bridge, building, canal (generally quite long) etc. No deviation from parallel field lines. It is a uniform field.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Now say that all again in complete sentences, so it's understandable, and with references if possible. Also, explain how these light gates work and what you think is perpendicular to the ground. Note that any radius of a sphere is perpendicular to its surface (or, more specifically, the plane tangent to its surface where they meet, in exactly the same way that a radius of a circle is perpendicular to the tangent to its circumference where the two meet), what we are looking to do here is prove that these vectors are parallel to each other.
If the circumference of this circle is "the ground", both of these vectors are perpendicular to it. They are not parallel to each other.
I have no idea what construction projects have to do with anything, as I said, one km on the surface is less than 1/100th degree of angle. If the earth is a sphere, it's a big one compared to most construction projects.
Yet you appear to have no problem with theories that cannot, by your own admission, be proven experimentally, but do support your kooky beliefs. Odd.Anyway, observations can of course provide strong evidence of relationships, aka physical laws. You don't need an independent variable you control yourself when you can make thousands of observations where the universe controls it
It isn't a theory unless proven by experiment. Period.
"The universe controls it for you"
You just failed the year 6 (that's ages 10-11 in the UK) science curriculum.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Now say that all again in complete sentences, so it's understandable, and with references if possible. Also, explain how these light gates work and what you think is perpendicular to the ground. Note that any radius of a sphere is perpendicular to its surface (or, more specifically, the plane tangent to its surface where they meet, in exactly the same way that a radius of a cir
The universe controls the light gates for you. Therefore gravity. Something like that.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
It isn't a theory unless proven by experiment. Period.
"The universe controls it for you"
You just failed the year 6 (that's ages 10-11 in the UK) science curriculum.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
You are the one acting like a 6 year old, by proclaiming things to be absolute that are not. Most adults understand nuance, exceptions to rules and things like that. Children struggle with that stuff.
