DiscussMormonism.com

If I got it wrong, you should easily be able to correct me. But you won't. Because it would show that you are relying on some trivial difference. That's not true. It's almost impossible to correct people unless they want to think otherwise. :D Yes, it is. I'll do it right here with your last post. ...

Valo wrote: ↑

Mon May 13, 2024 10:57 pm

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Mon May 13, 2024 10:55 pm

Do you really think you're the first anti-science, anti-education, gadfly to wander in here. You're not just "talking." You're asserting straight up nonsense.

Okay, how so?

I don't know how. I think it has something to do with the arrogance of ignorance.

Valo wrote: ↑

Mon May 13, 2024 10:53 pm

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Mon May 13, 2024 10:52 pm

What did you assert?

Go read it a few posts up.

If I got it wrong, you should easily be able to correct me. But you won't. Because it would show that you are relying on some trivial difference.

Valo, buddy, we've got to talk. I asked the question about the aether because it was part of the Davidic Servant's explanation of gravity. Remember in another thread you talk about an engine and tracking all the parts that go into an engine? If somebody starts talking about bananas and chisels as c...

That's not what the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment shows. It does not assert that the observer has any control over whether the cat is alive or dead when the box is opened. Nor can the observer effect the result of the double slit experiment through force of will. PG can correct me, but what...

And the reason the DS is talking about the aether is that it is mentioned twice in the Bible, right? I have no idea. You are scared of new ideas aren't you? :D LOL! You're not talking about new ideas. The aether is a very old idea. You're confusing ideas you've encountered recently with new ideas. ...

If there are always observers, then your reference to Schroedinger's cat is meaningless. The observer gets to determine their reality. It's not set in stone, maybe. That's not what the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment shows. It does not assert that the observer has any control over whether the...

My lab partner and I designed and built an apparatus to test the relationship between a falling object, the object rolling down an inclined plane, and the angle of the plane. I learned that our experiment delivered inaccurate results because we had neglected to take into account the angular momentu...

The Many Worlds interpretation requires no observer to collapse the wave function. And it's much more elegant and simple. Well how would you know if there is no observer? It's like saying, base 10 is arbitrary because in some possible world we have 8 fingers. But there are observers. Unless you den...

Exactly. No 'magic.' If I recall correctly, it was Sagan who said he was surprised there weren't more coincidences found by 'searchers', given how utterly normal and common coincidences are. And coincidences in numbers? Even with the cheats and multiple methods and mid-analysis rule changing and cr...