JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
haha, siryoso binasa mo ba ang blueprint analogy? or ang wiki? or ung vids? na iintindihan mo ba ung scientific theory? or confused ka lng sa common usage ng word na theory?
Tutulongan moba kasi yun ang akma or hindi ka tutulong para sa paniniwala.
- Thread starter xXxBlockedxXx
- Start date
-
- Tags
- @ghabo malig
- Status
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
aba di ako confused ikaw ata pati si richard dawkins inaamin na di facts ang theory tapos ikaw pinag pipilitan mo na facts ang theory? eh nakalagay na nga sa wiki na a theory can be false and true at the same time to honor another theory. isipin mo false at true at the same time? pag sabihin may chance na pwede syang di totoo unlike facts na 100 percent na totoo. lol.
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
wow, so alam mong kinukompara mo ung blueprint sa tunay na bahay at sinasabi mong ung blueprint ay hindi tunay na bahay?
Ano bang god ang pinag uusapan natin diba Bible god ? So tingin mo naniniwala si michio kaku sa Bible god hahaha naging specific lang ako since ang pinag oo sapan natin ay Bible god at sa sinabi mong magka tulad lang ang naniniwala sa scientific theory sa mga theist na blindly fallowing religion
Hahahaha the fact na sinabi mong magkatulad lang yun ay isa kang kahihiyan sa agnosticism
Una ang dahilan mo kaya na sabi ang bagay nayan ay hindi mo alam ang meaning ng scientific theory at pangalawa hindi mo alam kung ano ano ang mga scientific methods men andami mong hindi alam wahahahaha
Pangatlo you're being self contradictory plus you are a fallacious
Sa sinabi mong anti god na agenda ko another fallacy ulit nako men you're being roasted here don't you feel it ?
Pano ako magiging anti god about thousand or even more gods/goddesses may napatunayan ba wala
so paano nag karoon ng legit God abir ? since wala pano ako magiging anti sa isang fallacy lamang since Faith is not fact kaya nga Faith hahahaha
Kita mo na ang kaibahan ng utak natin ? Men you got to improve your arguments or else you'll always be get schooled
Bwahahahaha without copy paste you're nothing pasalamat ka may internet naliligaw mo ako
Yung mga mali ko na pag type na ine exposed mo normal lang yan sa taong natatalo na sa argument maghahanap nalang ng maling pagka sabi hahaha which is dina bago saakin yan wahahaha palibhasa di-kasi makakain ng tamang sustansya ehh
Sabi hindi maniniwala sa theory tas maypa simulation theory pang nalalaman bwahahaha men kumain ka ng tama ha ng yung utak mo mag work din ng tama
Hindi mo naiintindihan yung argument natin sinabi kong wala akong klene claim since ang science ay nagbabago pagmay mas accurate na scientific theory
Pati yung line mo na “the honesty of science ” hindi mo rin naintindihan wahahaha tas may pa trash talk kapang nalalaman
Ang hindi ko lang gusto ay ang maling akala mo sa scientific theory na ang big bang ay hindi proven
Hindi ko pa nasabi sayo to pero ngayon alam na alam na isa kang certified b O b O
kahihiyan ka sa Field ng agnosticism aw nga pala self proclaimed kalang pala haha
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
ganyan ba kayong athiest? natatawa ako sa mga rebuttal si wala daw ibang theory ahaha invalid ka na I don't have to challenge kung ano sasabihin mo dahil napatunayang mali ka na.
kung bible lang pala pinoproblema mo edi di ka pala athiest antichrist ka lang exposed again. lol.
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
ayan na, hahaha, sigurado ako sir na hindi mo na iintindihan ung mga vids, wiki at analogy, it useless to argue to a person who don't know what is what.
kahit na explain na kng ano ang pinagkaiba ng theory, law at fact go parin na hindi fact ang theory haha, ignorante.
na explain ko na ang pinagkaiba ng theory at fact, ipaglaban mo na hindi fact ang theory kasi talagang magkaiba sila haha.
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
4:00: 4:20
a theory can change and rejected with new discovery. ikaw ata di nakaka intindi.
Theories formally and scientifically[You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
Main article: You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
Theories are You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. tools for You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., and making You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. about a given subject matter. There are theories in many and varied fields of study, including the You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. and You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. A formal theory is You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. in nature and is only meaningful when given a You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. component by applying it to some content (e.g., You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. and relationships of the actual historical world as it is unfolding). Theories in various fields of study are expressed in You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., but are always constructed in such a way that their general form is identical to a theory as it is expressed in the You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. of You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. Theories may be expressed mathematically, symbolically, or in common language, but are generally expected to follow principles of You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. or You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..
Theory is constructed of a set of You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. that are entirely true statements about the subject under consideration. However, the truth of any one of these statements is always relative to the whole theory. Therefore, the same statement may be true with respect to one theory, and not true with respect to another. This is, in ordinary language, where statements such as "He is a terrible person" cannot be judged as true or false without reference to some You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. of who "He" is and for that matter what a "terrible person" is under the theory.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
Regarding the term theoretical[You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.]
Acceptance of a theory does not require that all of its major predictions be tested[You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.], if it is already supported by sufficiently strong evidence. For example, certain tests may be infeasible or technically difficult. As a result, theories may make predictions that have not yet been confirmed or proven incorrect; in this case, the predicted results may be described informally using the term "theoretical." These predictions can be tested at a later time, and if they are incorrect, this may lead to revision, invalidation, or rejection of the theory.
buti inamin mo na mag kaiba sila so tapos na tong discussion na to.
Wahahaha face Palm did you even know how to readganyan ba kayong athiest? natatawa ako sa mga rebuttal si wala daw ibang theory ahaha invalid ka na I don't have to challenge kung ano sasabihin mo dahil napatunayang mali ka na.
kung bible lang pala pinoproblema mo edi di ka pala athiest antichrist ka lang exposed again. lol.
Baka gusto mo mag bisaya nalang tayo puro ka invalid ni since noong una flawed na yung mga pinagsasabi mo at ngayon may isang error kana naman
Yun ang hindi maronong umintindi sa binabasa wahahaha
Sinabi kong thousand or maybe more god/goddesses pero walang napatunayan so meaning to say walang legit na god
Pano yung naging anti god? ni anti fallacy siguro , fallacy lang ang hindi ko gusto kaya noong unang argument natin ay nag demand ako ng proof about god wahahahaha isa kang mang mang wahahaha
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
hahaha, uo magkaiba sila ikaw tong nag mamarunung na mas mababang uri ng fact ang theory, ngayun sasabihin mong magkaiba sila haha iba ka rin.
ang galing haha. cocompare mo pa ang fact sa theory tapos sabihin mong mag kaiba sila haha.
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
e bat di mo nireject ung god claim ni michio kaku? ano ka namimili? t@nga ka lang talaga. halatang flimsy ka sa religion mo. kung saan mo lang gusto deny dun ka lang exposed ka nanaman ulit sa pinag sasabi mo. ahaha
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
bigyan kita ng fact may tenga ako. bigyan kita ng theory baka kulang chromosomes mo kaya ganyan ka.
buti inamin mo na fact at theory iiba dahil meron kasabihan na destroyed by facts and logic. ahahaha
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
haha, buti alam mo na kng ano ang pinagkaiba ng theory at fact, sana next time wag tayung mag tackle ng subjects na hindi natin na iintindihan para naman hindi ma misinform ang bumabasa.
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
buti alam mo na talo ka na sana next time give me a better arguement. sige mag explain ka pa para ma intindihan ko kung bakit ganyan takbo ng utak ng mga athiesta.
wag ka gumamit ng mga ganyan ending speech ung mga evidences mo weak at you're doing your religion disservice pati mismo si richard dawkins na sabi ang evolution theory is indeed still a theory not a fact.
just like newton's gravity law is a fact and not a theory.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. -gravity facts
Last edited:
Wahaha ano ba ang God ni kaku ni walang siyang kong ano anong sinasabi gaya ng ginawa ng Bible , Quran at iba pa
Walang kwenta ang pinagsasabi nyito
"I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. To me, it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance."
Michio Kaku
Anong mali dyan did he claim sining God ito? sinabi nyang shaped by a universal intelligence wahahahaha kung ano anong sinasabi palpak kahihiyan ka sa agnotismo ulol
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
t@nga ka talaga alam mo ung god of spinoza? lol. wag ka nga ang bo bo mong kausap lumalabas na kat@ngahan mo mag research ka muna ng maayos ang bo-bo mo.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. -michio kaku on god of spinoza
In any event, when asked about God, Kaku is likely to quote Einstein’s suggestion that there are two types of god: “One god is a personal god, the god that you pray to, the god that smites the Philistines, the god that walks on water. That’s the first god. But there’s another god, and that’s the god of Spinoza. That’s the god of beauty, harmony, simplicity.”
bo bo mo wag ka mag reply dito puro katangahan sinasabi mo.
mag lalagay ka lang ng quote kulang pa kaya di na ako nag tataka na baka may kulang rin sa utak mo.
Last edited:
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
hahaha, astig ah, alam mo ba ung calculation ng newtons law eh naka depende sa theory of relativity? haha, ung G constant ay nakukuha sa theory of relativity, ibig-sabihin kng sa tingin mo fact ang newtons law na derive ang variables sa isang theory. hahaha,
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
nag bigay na ako ng link
FROMQUARKSTOQUASARS
Newtonian Physics vs. Special Realtivity
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.March 1st 2013
Let the battle begin, Newton Vs Einstein. The all out battle for space-time.
Both Albert Einstein and Sir Issac Newton are regarded as the forefathers of physics, but both held different theories that are fundamentally different from the other. So in the grand scheme of things.. who was more correct… Einstein or Newton.
Here, we battle it out, but ultimately, the choice is up to you!
So let’s start with Newton! In the world of Newtonian physics, everything looks the same to everyone else in the universe, irrespective of your location and speed. I don’t know about the rest of you, but this seems like a very logical concept, probably because this is how we all view every day life. When I used to play cricket, I had no doubt that my view of the cricket ball hurtling through the air looked the same as someone driving down the road watching the ball (points of view taken into consideration of course). What I’m getting at here is that they didn’t see the ball stretching, moving slowly, and blue shifting.
Really then, the world in Newtonian physics makes sense to us in every day life. I know if I was to tell a group of 11 year old school children that a 1 meter ruler actually appear to be a different length when I’m holding it versus when I’m running with it, they’re likely to think I’m kidding (or crazy). Why? Because we can’t show it. If I did that little experiment with the students, it would still look exactly the same size. And considering that it’s only something like .000000000000000088.. meters longer to the outside observer, I can’t blame anyone for not believing me. Even while traveling on an aeroplane it would only be .00000000000029 meters longer! The point I’m making here is that Newton making the assumption that the universe is exactly the same for everyone else, irrespective of location or speed, was a completely logical assumption. So much so that suggesting anything more at the time would have been completely dismissed–they would have thought he was crazy.
This is where You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. enters the picture… at the right place, but most importantly, at the right time. There were many scientists with many ideas at the time, incomplete ideas. Einstein managed to unify many different theories into several papers, five of which were published in the same year. This is not to take away from his brilliance, it’s just the nature of science. Einstein managed to combine many different ideas (that were not his own) with an idea of his own and, in so doing, completely change the world.
This is no small task.
A good example of this is the Theories of Relativity and the You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. Although, in many cases, Einstein gets credit for this, it was first published by Joseph Larmor in 1897, proposed by Hendrik Lorentz in 1895, and eventually modified by Henri Poincare in 1905 but accredited to Lorentz by Poincare. But although Einstein may not have come up with the equation, he did tie it all together in his Special Relativity paper.
Unlike in a Newtonian world, the universe is not quite a constant, for the most part anyway. Taking a look at the Lorentz Transformation using time as our variable:
t’=t/sqrt(1-((v^2)/(c^2)))
In this equation we see that Time and Velocity are variables because neither of them have a constant physical value, like the speed of light “c”. Here we can see that the speed of light MUST be a constant in the universe. This agrees with Newtonian physics, the speed of light being a constant, with time and length being different, this bit obviously doesn’t agree with Newton.
So in the end in the battle between Newton and Einstein, who is right? In every day life, they both are. The speeds at which life goes by are so slow that it has only been in recent history that we have been able to detect the differences. Newton viewed space-time as being flat, unchanging and very boring, but that is not at all the case in You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. To Einstein, space-time is very dynamic, changing depending gravity and velocity.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
scientific laws isn't subjected to change unlike theories. halatang di mo pinanood ung mga video na ninilink ko ano yan guessing game?
Last edited:
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
pointless na.nag bigay na ako ng link
FROMQUARKSTOQUASARS
Newtonian Physics vs. Special Realtivity
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.March 1st 2013
Let the battle begin, Newton Vs Einstein. The all out battle for space-time.
Both Albert Einstein and Sir Issac Newton are regarded as the forefathers of physics, but both held different theories that are fundamentally different from the other. So in the grand scheme of things.. who was more correct… Einstein or Newton.
Here, we battle it out, but ultimately, the choice is up to you!
So let’s start with Newton! In the world of Newtonian physics, everything looks the same to everyone else in the universe, irrespective of your location and speed. I don’t know about the rest of you, but this seems like a very logical concept, probably because this is how we all view every day life. When I used to play cricket, I had no doubt that my view of the cricket ball hurtling through the air looked the same as someone driving down the road watching the ball (points of view taken into consideration of course). What I’m getting at here is that they didn’t see the ball stretching, moving slowly, and blue shifting.
Really then, the world in Newtonian physics makes sense to us in every day life. I know if I was to tell a group of 11 year old school children that a 1 meter ruler actually appear to be a different length when I’m holding it versus when I’m running with it, they’re likely to think I’m kidding (or crazy). Why? Because we can’t show it. If I did that little experiment with the students, it would still look exactly the same size. And considering that it’s only something like .000000000000000088.. meters longer to the outside observer, I can’t blame anyone for not believing me. Even while traveling on an aeroplane it would only be .00000000000029 meters longer! The point I’m making here is that Newton making the assumption that the universe is exactly the same for everyone else, irrespective of location or speed, was a completely logical assumption. So much so that suggesting anything more at the time would have been completely dismissed–they would have thought he was crazy.
This is where You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. enters the picture… at the right place, but most importantly, at the right time. There were many scientists with many ideas at the time, incomplete ideas. Einstein managed to unify many different theories into several papers, five of which were published in the same year. This is not to take away from his brilliance, it’s just the nature of science. Einstein managed to combine many different ideas (that were not his own) with an idea of his own and, in so doing, completely change the world.
This is no small task.
A good example of this is the Theories of Relativity and the You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. Although, in many cases, Einstein gets credit for this, it was first published by Joseph Larmor in 1897, proposed by Hendrik Lorentz in 1895, and eventually modified by Henri Poincare in 1905 but accredited to Lorentz by Poincare. But although Einstein may not have come up with the equation, he did tie it all together in his Special Relativity paper.
Unlike in a Newtonian world, the universe is not quite a constant, for the most part anyway. Taking a look at the Lorentz Transformation using time as our variable:
t’=t/sqrt(1-((v^2)/(c^2)))
In this equation we see that Time and Velocity are variables because neither of them have a constant physical value, like the speed of light “c”. Here we can see that the speed of light MUST be a constant in the universe. This agrees with Newtonian physics, the speed of light being a constant, with time and length being different, this bit obviously doesn’t agree with Newton.
So in the end in the battle between Newton and Einstein, who is right? In every day life, they both are. The speeds at which life goes by are so slow that it has only been in recent history that we have been able to detect the differences. Newton viewed space-time as being flat, unchanging and very boring, but that is not at all the case in You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.. To Einstein, space-time is very dynamic, changing depending gravity and velocity.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
comparing a fact to a theory is stupidity that doesn't lead to progress.
“No great discovery was ever made without a bold guess.” Isaac Newton
Lets-All-Love-Lain
Eternal Poster
wala akong pake sa sinabi mo ang importante dun mali ka sa sinabi mo na ine-explain ng relativity theory ang newton's law of gravity in fact mag kasalungat nga sila eh. wag ka gumamit ng quote ng matatalinong tao di bagay ganyan na ganyan mga banat ng mga pseudo intellectual.
Last edited:
JackFrost10
Honorary Poster
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
mali ka, ginawa ang theory of relativity to explain gravity itself, superseding newton's law of gravity. theory of relativity is being used by GPS technology(real life use of a theory yet its still a theory not a fact).
- Status
Similar threads
-
Trivia Ang Ilang Paniniwala Tungkol sa pagdurusa
- Started by Gentleman007
- Replies: 2
-
Trivia Ang Paniniwala ng Isang Mathematician
- Started by Gentleman007
- Replies: 0
-
Trivia Ang Paniniwala ng Isang Disenyador ng Robot
- Started by Gentleman007
- Replies: 0
-
@GOD JESUS ACCEPT GOD JESUS AS YOUR PERSONAL SAVIOR AMEN
- Started by Grangermiya
- Replies: 4
-
@GOD JESUS ACCEPT GOD JESUS AS YOUR PERSONAL SAVIOR AMEN
- Started by Grangermiya
- Replies: 0
Popular Tags
about
amen
ang
as
atheist
belief
beliefs
bible
bible verse
bible verses
christianity
daily
day
diyos
faith
father
gentleman007
god
grimlifehacks
heaven
heavenly father
in
january
jesus
life
love
march
mass
only
people
personal
philippine folklore
popular
prayer
psalms
reading
readings
religion
sagot ng bibliya
savior
that
the bible
trivia
verse
verses
way
what
why
you
your