Why do Nu-Males and Millennials take theories like "Gravity, Big Bang and Evolution" as the absolute truth when in fact, they are still just theories yet to proven?
Because you dont even know what the term "theory" means in science. You just hear the word theory in movies and shit and you have no idea what it actually means.
Maybe you should educate yourself on everything before you come here and complain.
>>74028139
>theory
A theory is a generally accepted and tested hypothesis that actually has numerous other experiments to back it up.
You'd know this if you went to University, huenigger.
>>74028139
quantum mechanics changed everything
>>74028139
I have watched evolution happen though.
If you want too to here's a pro tip: become a molecular biologist like me
>>74028287
Cool, but I'm talking about species evolution, not tiny molecules.
>>74028139
Can you also explain every point on your slide and discuss why this disproves newtonian physics?
>>74028139
There is no instantaneous gravitational force.
>>74028454
Statistical analysis of the DNA (in multiple ways, across multiple set of individuals of and species) have demonstrated variation patterns consistant with the theorized evolutionary mechanisms. I don't remember when that became sufficiently conclusive (maybe the 60s?)... but that pretty much removed any doubt there still were (and there weren't much, mostly from contrarian faggots).
>>74028460
Just because something heavier than air falls, doesn't mean there's a force pulling it down
>>74028849
Explain why things fall then, Sherlock.
I would assume because a bit more thought went into those theories
>>74028849
If their is no acting force on objects then they are all the same weight... right? Or am i missing something?
>>74028849
Why does air stay within a certain layer of the Earth, then? Is air simply everywhere in the universe?
Why do lighter-than-air objects ascend instead of simply entering a zero G state?
>>74028139
>Everything we know is just a theory, nothing can be proven with 100% certainty.
>However, some theories are so consistent and useful they are considered "true" because they work for most things and can help when making informed decisions.
>Good example being Newtons laws of motion, they have been disproven but are good enough to put satellites in space.
Its that easy you retard.
>>74028488
there was in the original newtonian model
also lightspeed was infinite to newton
>>74028849
It's all about predictive power with gravity. You can call any of the concepts anything you want as long as you come up with correct predictions in the end. Thankfully there are some conventions that eventually emerge.
Newtonian physics is still good enough for most applications and is straightforward. Relativity has more predictive power but is a lot more complicated.
>>74028139
Because they believe in it
What a meme picture, OP.
Black holes as described are prohibited by special and general relativity, yet they exist.
>>74028849
I think youre trolling but meh
the weight of objects can be measured
the weight is the force pulling it down
>>74029496
Weight has nothing to do with being pulled down. Weight is how much force an object will have once impacting another object, based on its acceleration, which is determined by a gravitational force drawing all matter and energy towards a central location.
>>74029444
>>74029297 (my previous post, not anti science troll)
To be fair its quite accepted in the scientific community that black holes are still just a theory.We haven't ever spotted an event horizon, merely indications of super massive objects that SHOULD act like black holes, but since we have never gotten close enough to observe one we still don't know for sure, right now they are only predicted (and highly likely to exist).
>>74028139
Theory =/= hypothesis
>>74028139
>Half of modern physics were formulated with some intervention of the theory of gravity
>It was proven hundreds of millions of times along history
>Gravity is vital to engineering, architecture and several others
>Somehow this fucking retard thinks it is fake
You're the reason this country won't go forward.
>>74029694
>american education
you should know about this, since youhave so much of it
>>74029747
But it is known that there are super-massive, dense objects that (almost) do not emit EM right?
>>74029983
If you would read what you just posted you would see that it does not always have to be gravity.
>weight of an object is USUALLY TAKEN to be gravity.
>>74030145
Not as far as i know, all the potential black hole objects found so far, if i'm not incorrect, are either to far away to safely say if they have an event horizon. And the closer ones, i.e the one at the center of the milky way, has so much interference around it it neither can be observed properly.
I'm here for the discussion though so if i'm wrong please point it out.
>>74028139
>doesn't believe in gravity
what the fuck
>>74030471
>the one at the center of the milky way
I *think* there were more black holes in our own galaxy (some closer than the core), but maybe they are small and difficult to observe. I thought they were almost certain to have identified objects that pretty much have to be black holes.
I'm really not sure anymore though. Eh. :/
>>74030750
Doesn't understand modern science really.
>>74028235
This. People who confuse the colloquial meaning of theory and the scientific meaning of theory are the greatest of cucks.
>>74030181
I said nothing about gravity, I said weight is a force
>>74028235
oh yeah? what causes gravity?
>>74031087
Literally doesn't matter.
PREDICTIVE POWER
>>74030979
What puts the weight into action? Without gravity, weight is meaningless.
What makes the weight go down instead of up?
>>74031087
science BTFO!
I am a jezusmissile now
>>74031087
Does it really matter?
What caused the Big Bang?
Or, in your case, what caused God to exist?
>>74031147
>no present model of physics can account for gravity
>it doesn't matter!
You're like a medieval scribe believing spontaneous generation because its predictive.
Believing a man in a chariot pulls the sun across the sky is "predictive" as well
>>74028139
kek. It's the age old retard "they're just theories" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTY1Kje0yLg
>>74031087
Gravity is the least understood things in science in that its weak compared to the other forces but constant everywhere. Gravity could be just something that leaks over from higher dimensions.
>>74028139
There is no such thing as a proven scientific theory, you idiot.
In science you propose hypotheses, which people then try to disprove. In fact, that is the prime requirement of something being "scientific" - one should be able to design an experiment that would potentially show it to be false.
You can only test a hypothesis and prove that it is false. You can never prove it is true, since it takes only one experiment to show it is false.
Now it turns out that many theories such as relativity and quantum mechanics have millions of experiments that failed to prove they are false.
Hence they are taken as relative truths.
>>74031367
>no present model of physics can account for gravity
Maybe because it's a law of the universe.
What causes Survival of the Fittest?
>>74031277
>wanting to study more about forces that bind the universe together
>makes me a jezuzmissile
>>74031087
Gravity is quite simply a natural phenomenon that (as far as we know) generally causes objects to be drawn together.
We can predict how gravity will affect objects using various laws such as Newton's law of universal gravitation (not very precise but good enough for most purposes) or even theories such as General Relativity and even Special Relativity.
What exactly causes Gravity or what Gravity actually is really doesn't matter for most things. What matters is how we can predict it.
And we can.
Very reliably.
Over very large amounts of time.
Gravity is a phenomenon, and we're very good at predicting how exactly it will work. Finding out what exactly causes Gravity or how Gravity works is in the domain of theoretical physics at the moment.
>>74031465
>wanting to study more about forces that bind the universe together
>more like denying that those forces exist
>>74031367
>Believing a man in a chariot pulls the sun across the sky is "predictive" as well
If you arrive at the same results following your weird calculations, then yes, it's good too.
In general, the simpler theory is considered more elegant and "correct". It's usually simpler to teach and understand anyway.
>>74031574
No, we're only good at predicting how gravity works at large scales.
>>74031617
>wanting to use science to figure out more science
>anti science
>to be pro science you have to accept without question
i dont even know whose jewing who at this point anymore
>>74031574
didnt expect such a great answer from australia
>>74031754
That's because Gravity is for all intents and purposes irrelevant at small scales. Its effects are so weak as to be outdone by every other force in the universe at said scales.
>>74028139
Is Nu-male the /pol/ version of cis-male or something?
>>74031754
>No, we're only good at predicting how gravity works at large scales.
It entirely depends on what you're trying to predict.
Predicting Gravity's effect on things like small molecules? That's useless as Gravity has no real effect on them.
One can predict simple things such as the movement of an aerofoil through the atmosphere of a body, or the general path an object will take if it falls, along with things such as orbiting a body.
We can also (to a certain amount of accuracy) predict things such as the motions of bodies in a star system, and we can even calculate the movement of star clusters within galaxies if we bring down the accuracy of the simulation a bit.
We're limited by the amount of processing power we have, and various other things that can affect a system (Chaos Theory comes to mind).
>>74031754
>to be pro science you have to accept without question
Science is putting forward a hypothesis.
You look for proof that this is wrong, but you just get proof that it's right.
You then research it more and more.
It becomes a theory.
A scientific theory is as close as you can get to fact.
>>74031367
>Believing a man in a chariot pulls the sun across the sky is "predictive" as well.
If you believe he does this in relation with the inverse square of the distance between the celestial bodies, then this model makes no practical difference with the current model and can be used.
Just to get things clear : I'm equally upset about beta leftists trying to transform science into a religion, and various religious groups (american ones, or in muslim countries) trying to find fault in every theory they get their hands on.
If the model fits the experimental data and can be used to predict what is happening and act on it to create new shit, then cool. Just let researchers and engineers work ffs.
>>74028224
Yes this
>>74028139
>gravity
>evolution
>theory
lmao fucking monkey
>>74028139
>evolution
it sure is weird how our mitochondria have DNA which is indistinguishable from bacterial DNA, specifically Rickettsia from the SAR11 clade, lmao
>>74031087
>>74028139
Recent studies of quarks have proven that on different galaxies, our rules of physics may not apply. Even Einstein's special relatively could be incorrect elsewhere so we really don't know. Doesn't make these theories unable to apply though, which is all that matters in the end
Cool, the endgame of alt-right ideology. Grabbing the popcorn.
>>74031754
>we're only good at predicting how gravity works at large scales.
not true
also with the recent discovery of gravitational waves we have solid evidence to support that gravity causes a curvature in space hence the attraction
>>74031367
I'd like to note here that before we went into a heliocentric version of the universe, we could actually quite reliably predict the motions of bodies over decent amounts of time. However, the techniques used were extremely complicated and were made much simpler by changing to other techniques.
>>74028139
The wrong perielion shift of mercury in newtonian mechanics is a proof of general relativity you nigger
>>74032144
It just proves how God made us all of the same stuff.
>>74032144
You know that bit actually helps to prove evolution right? the symbiotic genesis theory where the mitochondrial cell and a non-mitochondrial cell "fused" to create the very first forms of complicated organic cells?
Gravity isnt instant. Fucking idiots. Also we don't really know a lot from gravity but we can say that it exist. Go to fucking /sci/ with this or something.
>>74028139
Evolutiona and gravity are proven, Big Bang is not thought. There are counter theories to Big Bang that are just as valid by the physical laws we know today, I wonder how it got so popular as to teached as absolute truth in schools.
>>74032333
General relativity is even harder than special relativity. I can't even understand that shit (as in what Einstein wrote down not some faggot ass wikipedia page). Hell even most professors I have met said they don't fully grasp it either.
>>74028849
Well it literally does, you should have said "doesn't mean gravity is pulling it down"
>>74031367
>Being pulled by a chariot
How silly! Everyone knows that the sun and the moon are being CHASED by giant spectral wolves.
>>74032509
General relativity is fundamentally geometric. I was lucky enough to study geometric first. It says spacetime is a 4D geometric manifold with a Riemannian metric than varies based on mass density.
>>74031421
That's an incorrect take on the falsifiability theory. Things can be proven to be correct partially, but good theories can be and should be challenged. It's not an actual scientific measurement of the veracity of any theory. It's more of a social contract among scientists so their works can be challenged and improved upon.
>>74031367
>Believing a man in a chariot pulls the sun across the sky is "predictive" as well
if you live in 1000BC Greece, sure
>>74031087
NOBODY FUCKING KNOWS OK
GRAVITY IS A MEME WE INVENTED BECAUSE WE KNOW FUCK ALL ABOUT THE UNIVERSE
BLACK MATTER? GRAVITACIONAL ''FIELDS''?
M E M E S
E
M
E
S
>>74033418
Jesus. It's like you're trying to make fun of smart people by straw manning them and then overusing your shitty memes.
Go back to /b/ you retard.
>>74032755
No, it is not just a social contract. Falsifiability is a central requirement of something to be considered scientific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science#Defining_science
In fact, some people have raised doubts whether String Theory should be considered scientific because of this (see "Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene).
You can conduct a million experiment and still have doubts whether a theory is really "true" or not. That is why we can never prove a theory is true. We can only fail to prove that it is false.
Quote by Einstein: "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability#Quotations
Now, you are right in that intelligent people generally agree that after thousands, if not millions, of failed attempts at proving something to be false, one can reasonably take it as being true. The problem comes when Christ-tards refuse to be reasonable like this, and keep holding out the possibility that it is may not be true.
>>74029983
Dont even try, burgers are retarded
>>74029983
>>74034333
You forgot to read "Due to gravity."
If gravity weren't there, weight would be meaningless.
What would bring the weight down?
What would prevent the weight from floating in all directions?
>>74034465
>gravity weren't there
Gravity is a force.
Weight can be imposed by any other force.
If I put you in a fighter jet on an aircraft carrier and suddenly accelerate you to takeoff speed, Gravity isn't doing shit, but you'll suddenly feel 3 to 4 times heavier.
That's the acceleration.
Acceleration is a force.
>>74034619
>>74034798
Wait, I misread your post.
You feel 3 to 4 times heavier because you're being pulled down while in the air.
Acceleration (and the jet) prevents the gravity from getting to you immediately.
However, if you lost control of the jet, then the acceleration would cease, and you would crash.
What causes that?
>>74032231
Hawking said in his first book, "A brief history of time", from 1988, that C, P and T-symmetries of the laws of physics could behave differently elsewhere, that our counterpart (antimatter) can exist out there, although very unlikely near so much matter as we see, and that forces, particles and energy are different in extreme concentration of heat/energy.
Sorry if I'm trippin', I'm only a enthusiast for now.
>>74031087
gravity is an effect of space warping with magnetic matter in time
a proportional manipulation in the wave length
>>74028943
Nothing supporting them is the obvious answer.
>>74035017
>You feel 3 to 4 times heavier because you're being pulled down while in the air.
Nope. See my next response.
>Acceleration (and the jet) prevents the gravity from getting to you immediately.
The jet itself isn't completely rigid and you're not perfectly attached to it, so when it accelerates you're not going to instantly accelerate with it. The acceleration you feel is the jet physically pulling you with it, therefore amplifying your weight.
>However, if you lost control of the jet, then the acceleration would cease, and you would crash.
Now you're talking about lift, which is completely different from acceleration.
>>74035197
How many bombed hospitals do you need to develop a complex understanding of terrorism?
>>74035189
it can be thought of as a relative function of magnetism, from the anti-perspective of the matter.
>>74029747
>To be fair its quite accepted in the scientific community that black holes are still just a theory
And it doesn't get better than a theory.
Also the standard you want to think black holes exist means that you have to think all these exoplanets we have "discovered" don't actually exist because we don't directly obverse them but indirectly observe them, the effects the planet has on its star.
It would also be like using Radar to find aircraft and say those aircraft don't exist because your not really seeing the aircraft you are just seeing radio waves bounce off something.
>>74028139
Gravity is a Law, not a theory, you fucking monkey
Also, the meaning of the word "theory" is diferent in science and in general language
>>74031087
what will really cook your noodle is coping with the fact that space itself has more potential relative energy than any matter possibly could.
>>74035750
Except a theory can have laws in it. A law is just more specific while a theory is more general.
>>74035750
>gravity is a law
there is a law behind the theory of gravity, but we don't know what that law is yet. probably never will.
>implying gravity isn't the sum of non sm physics
>>74029308
which is why we don't use the newtonian model for relativistic motion
>>74028139
Does it matter? This is all a simulation anyway.
>>74028139
Evolution is a verified and verifiable fact. It happens. You can see it happen in the fossil record. Natural Selection is the theory of its mechanism.
Gravity doesn't actually exist. Anyone who went past intro to physics knows this. It isn't a force it only looks that way. Gravity is complicated which is why most "science communicators/ educators" dumb it way down and simplify it extensively. See relativity.
The "big bang" happened to the best of our knowledge. Basically very early on in the history of the universe(first few seconds) the universe and everything in it expanded from a single point to a volume very quickly. Then kept growing albeit at a slower rate. Hence it being called a bang. The very first hundreds of microseconds are still unknown to us and we have several theories on why/how we bangeded most of which are probably wrong. Tldr: big bang happened we don't.know why
>>74034619
>Acceleration is a force.
acceleration is the rate of change of speed
force is the rate of change of momentum
>>74030750
>2016
>Actually believing that gravity is real and not just a social construct
>>74031087
No one fucking knows but we know its there since we interact with it daily.
>>74031087
Mass cause gravity.
Easiest question I've heard of all my life, Gravitational force is calculated by the mass of the object attracting and attracted as well as the repartition of such mass in space.
>>74028139
>gravity
>muslim faggotry about a flat earth
pick one
>>74028276
>quantum mechanics are real
>>74039004
>not believing in particle physics because muh it's too complicated must be da jooz
kys niggerbrain
>>74039133
>oy vey you dumb antisemite! don't you see that this complete and utterly unscientific nonsense must be true because we dressed it up in fancy language and can eke out plausible results from time to time
>>74039343
>>74039133
ln the three centuries it's taken these people to emerge from the ghettos of Europe they've ripped us out of a world of order and reason, thrown us into class warfare, irrational urges, relativity, into a world where the very existence of matter and meaning is in question. Why? Cos it's the deepest impulse of a Jewish soul to pull at the very fabric of life till there's nothing left but a thread. They want nothing but nothingness.
>>74039882
>mimimi Im retarded and weak cuck and have to blame someone
>>74028139
>Instantaneous gravitational force violates special relativity
Dipshit, it isn't instantaneous, it travels at the speed of light.
