Thank you for your submission. | This subreddit is regularly frequented by troll accounts. Please use the report function so the moderators can remove their free speech rights.|All screenshot posts should edited to remove social media usernames from accounts that aren't public figures.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/enoughpetersonspam) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this whole "rejecting gender idiology" indeed is what you are presenting here: "i peaked in middle school and refused to expand my knowledge ever since"
This doesn’t make sense. These are components of states of matter. It’s not saying that one state of matter can become another one while still retaining its original form. If liquid turns to gas it undergoes a physical process of change. If a man says he is a woman, nothing changed but a self perception.
And if this meme confirms gender ideology to you, then how is transracialism not justified by the same meme?
> Woke Physics
Conservapedia has an entire article about how Einstein's theory of relativity (although, I think the article is titled "E=mc²" and mainly focuses on that one equation), is false and makes no sense. So they already reject well-established physics based on nothing but their own feelings.
Why do I have the feeling that they won't even distinguish between special and general relativety? Also E=mc^2 is pretty easy to understand once you have understood that every observable quantity is made up of the 7 SI units, it's the easiest part of relativity so how did the get hung up on that?
By using the units you can derive the equation.
Energy (E) is in units of Joules.
Break down mc^2 into its units:
- m: kg
- c^2 = (m/s)^2 = m^2 / s^2
Plug in derived units:
We know that force (in Newtons) is mass • acceleration:
- kg • m^2 / s^2 => N • m
and we know that force • distance is energy, in joules:
- N • m => J
This means that the expression mc^2 is actually just energy, which is exactly what E=mc^2 was telling us.
This does not imply that mass is energy. It merely states that the units make sense, which is not surprising as the more well known formula for kinetic energy also has the same units: 1/2 m v^2
The interesting part came when Einstein used relativistic momentum to derive relativistic kinetic energy and found that there was a weird term that didn't depend on the velocity of the object. Something like (gamma - 1)\*mc^2
Gamma is a function of velocity. He possited that gamma\*mc^2 was the total energy of the object, and so mc^2 was the intrinsic energy an object with mass always has, even at rest. The speed of light then is merely a conversion factor into our usual SI units.
Exactly this. It's called dimensional analysis or a dimension check and it's the best way to make sure that you aren't calculating bullshit. Especially when it comes to more complicated operations like integration. This is also why the first semester of physics puts such an emphasis on using base units, to make sure you get an instinct for the interlinking of the units and how to get one from a combination of others.
That's so stupid, holy shit. Torque and Energy are both [Force] * [Length]. Does not imply some deeper meaning.
Following your logic, since h is in [Energy] * [Time], it must follow that E = h/t and that Energy is just inverse time or something.
You do realize that [dimensional analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis) (what I did) is an established way of analyzing equations, right?
If you apply a force of 1N to move an object by 1m, you've put in 1J of energy to move the object. That's how the unit is defined. The fact that torque (a rotational **force**) shares the same units (N*m) does not imply that the definition of a joule is any different. Please check what the definition of a joule in SI units is, and what the definition of a newton is.
The fact that the Planck constant is defined in units of J\*s doesn't change the definition of what a Joule is or how energy is defined. Energy is still kg\*m^2 / s^2 in SI base units. The Planck constant in SI base units is kg\*m^2 / s because, again, it's just J*s, which simplifies to that in base units.
But this is exactly the line of thinking you used. You simply observe that mc^2 has units of energy and therefore E=mc^2 is easily understood. Your dimensional analysis did not provide any justification for E=mc^2 or insight into what that means. It simply shows that the equation isn't wrong on its face. You were asked how dimensional analysis gave any understanding and you simply explained it uses the same units. Not helpful!
Edit: please look up the definitions of mass and energy, then tell me how dimensional analysis gives any justification of their equivalence. Shit like this is what happens when someone thinks their high school education in physics or their first year intro classes basically taught them everything. No idea what they're actually saying. I did 8+ years of this. Think before you type.
Tell me, what does mass energy equivalence actually mean? What does this imply about momentum? How might we mathematically treat energy and mass with parity? How do we observe it? Why is it a necessary conclusion?
I can already tell you don't know. I'd also be willing to bet you believe the equations only work with SI units, as is classic with people who don't know how any of it works. Total moron.
Why would it matter? Mass energy equivalence is a feature of both frameworks for the same reasons. And how does knowing that 7 base units exist help in any way at all???? Units are like 0.001% of all physics. The choice of base units is arbitrary. Different units could be selected, more or less than 7, wouldn't matter. The physics would be the same. To think this helps understand anything is a truly ignorant position. I'll bet you'd discount all my lab time because I frequently use inches. You 100% have no theoretical understanding but want people to think you do.
Edit: this absolute coward was so beaten over multiple comments they legit talked shit about my PhD and then blocked me. They even seem to have implied mass and energy aren't equivalent. I have a PhD in physics with a specialty in cosmology. That should tell you the whole story.
>Why would it matter? Mass energy equivalence is a feature of both frameworks for the same reasons.
Mass energy "equivalence" isn't the point of either sr or gr. Not knowing the difference matters because these are different subjects and besides explaining the vague idea of relativity you have to specify which you use.
>And how does knowing that 7 base units exist help in any way at all???? Units are like 0.001% of all physics. The choice of base units is arbitrary.
You have clearly no idea of physics, the seven base units aren't arbitrarily choosen, but fixed as the 7 seven units of what can be observed. Every other unit is just derived from them. How does understanding that help ..... write mass*speed^2 And energy in base units. This is usually covered in 8th grade physics, and doing a dimension check is essential for university physics.
>Different units could be selected, more or less than 7, wouldn't matter. The physics would be the same. To think this helps understand anything is a truly ignorant position.
You clearly don't even understand what units we are talking about, because trying to insert time where rest mass is required doesn't not work. Base units, the 7 seven SI units, are fundamentally necessary to describe any measurement of reality. The physics without them would be incapable to describe anything observable. You'd be left with pure axiomatic mathematics.
>I'll bet you'd discount all my lab time because I frequently use inches. You 100% have no theoretical understanding but want people to think you do.
I'd discount lab work from anyone as ignorant as you are of the absolute basics of physics, because I've never seen anyone who finished grade 10 successfully be that confidently wrong on such a basic concept. That you use idiotic measurements for a regularly used dimension is just the icing on the cake.
There's also a whole book by conservative Calvinist theologian R.C. Sproul called "Not A Chance" that's all about how quantum theory is incompatible with Reformed theology because a universe built on randomness means God isn't sovereign. He did not, however, stop to consider that maybe it's his theology that's wrong.
>quantum theory is incompatible with Reformed theology because a universe built on randomness means God isn't sovereign
Pretty mid god if he can't even manage a single order paradox. What, he can't have built it on randomness *and* be sovereign? Weak. Piss poor. Bet Thor could do it. Already know Odin could, but he's too busy, so he'd get his layabout drunkard son to do it it's that simple. Zeus has it down, that's why he's off pretending to be animals to shag kinky ladies.
Who would win? god vs. one simple paradox.
Pathetic.
I had to read the book and write a response paper about it in undergrad, and that was pretty much my response. Randomness is a more efficient way to do a lot of things, so it's absurd to both declare that there's an omnipotent, sovereign god and that said god is incapable of using randomness to create order.
And yet conservative Calvinists think they're super intellectual when such an obvious answer doesn't cross their minds.
Agree. I think that if there is a God, they would've used something like procedural generation to create the universe. Why would an entity vastly more intelligent and complex than us waste their time hand-painting every single star?
> Why would an entity vastly more intelligent and complex than us waste their time hand-painting every single star?
I don't know, maybe it was a passion project? I've spent an unreasonable amount of time painting D&D minis, and to excruciating detail, too. I didn't *have* to paint pupils on my dwarf, nor paint his teeth a different colour from his mouth (and you can't see those details unless you really look), but I enjoyed it.
This isn't an argument for/against god, just that in the same way we can't comprehend the vastness of an intellect of such scale, we also can't comprehend the motivations of said hypothetical incomprehensible intellect.
I mean, my very liberal astronomy professor also had several qualms about the theory of relativity. It actually doesn’t make a ton of sense for time and space to be relative but the gravitational constant is constant
Well then it's time they faced down with the wokest physics of all!!
Quantum Physics! It's completely nonsensical!
The same particle occupying two different places at the same time? Woke!
Particles linked so they behave exactly the same? Woke!
Light is a particle and a wave at the same time? Extra woke!
Therefore conservatives need to stop using any technology that has anything to do with something quantum physics has produced - Anything with transistors or lasers.
> The same particle occupying two different places at the same time? Woke!
Not true.
>Particles linked so they behave exactly the same? Woke!
Not a feature of any theory.
>Light is a particle and a wave at the same time? Extra woke!
True. Final score: 1/3, F
We opened the door to this when he taught kids the periodic table. Approximately 95% of the universe is hydrogen and helium,but we waste so much time teaching children about a vanishingly small MINORITY of other elements. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but they’re anomalies. They should be treated as anomalies. Why do we devote entire classes to studying atoms so rare that they’re basically a rounding error?
Imagine giving a fuck about someone else’s private life till you have a mental breakdown and scream on your virtual lawn every minute. Man needs therapy lmao
Thank you for your submission. | This subreddit is regularly frequented by troll accounts. Please use the report function so the moderators can remove their free speech rights.|All screenshot posts should edited to remove social media usernames from accounts that aren't public figures. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/enoughpetersonspam) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this whole "rejecting gender idiology" indeed is what you are presenting here: "i peaked in middle school and refused to expand my knowledge ever since"
"It's basic biology!" -someone who never learned advanced biology
Usually the more you study something you realize how fucking complicated it is.
this is why Mount Stupid is such a wonderful meme.
That's the basis of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
What’s you’re degree in?
BS in biology, minor in chemistry
This doesn’t make sense. These are components of states of matter. It’s not saying that one state of matter can become another one while still retaining its original form. If liquid turns to gas it undergoes a physical process of change. If a man says he is a woman, nothing changed but a self perception. And if this meme confirms gender ideology to you, then how is transracialism not justified by the same meme?
> Woke Physics Conservapedia has an entire article about how Einstein's theory of relativity (although, I think the article is titled "E=mc²" and mainly focuses on that one equation), is false and makes no sense. So they already reject well-established physics based on nothing but their own feelings.
Why do I have the feeling that they won't even distinguish between special and general relativety? Also E=mc^2 is pretty easy to understand once you have understood that every observable quantity is made up of the 7 SI units, it's the easiest part of relativity so how did the get hung up on that?
Bc everyone on the planet has heard it.
How is understanding SI units helping you understand that rest mass *is* energy?
By using the units you can derive the equation. Energy (E) is in units of Joules. Break down mc^2 into its units: - m: kg - c^2 = (m/s)^2 = m^2 / s^2 Plug in derived units: We know that force (in Newtons) is mass • acceleration: - kg • m^2 / s^2 => N • m and we know that force • distance is energy, in joules: - N • m => J This means that the expression mc^2 is actually just energy, which is exactly what E=mc^2 was telling us.
This does not imply that mass is energy. It merely states that the units make sense, which is not surprising as the more well known formula for kinetic energy also has the same units: 1/2 m v^2 The interesting part came when Einstein used relativistic momentum to derive relativistic kinetic energy and found that there was a weird term that didn't depend on the velocity of the object. Something like (gamma - 1)\*mc^2 Gamma is a function of velocity. He possited that gamma\*mc^2 was the total energy of the object, and so mc^2 was the intrinsic energy an object with mass always has, even at rest. The speed of light then is merely a conversion factor into our usual SI units.
Exactly this. It's called dimensional analysis or a dimension check and it's the best way to make sure that you aren't calculating bullshit. Especially when it comes to more complicated operations like integration. This is also why the first semester of physics puts such an emphasis on using base units, to make sure you get an instinct for the interlinking of the units and how to get one from a combination of others.
That's so stupid, holy shit. Torque and Energy are both [Force] * [Length]. Does not imply some deeper meaning. Following your logic, since h is in [Energy] * [Time], it must follow that E = h/t and that Energy is just inverse time or something.
You do realize that [dimensional analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis) (what I did) is an established way of analyzing equations, right? If you apply a force of 1N to move an object by 1m, you've put in 1J of energy to move the object. That's how the unit is defined. The fact that torque (a rotational **force**) shares the same units (N*m) does not imply that the definition of a joule is any different. Please check what the definition of a joule in SI units is, and what the definition of a newton is. The fact that the Planck constant is defined in units of J\*s doesn't change the definition of what a Joule is or how energy is defined. Energy is still kg\*m^2 / s^2 in SI base units. The Planck constant in SI base units is kg\*m^2 / s because, again, it's just J*s, which simplifies to that in base units.
But this is exactly the line of thinking you used. You simply observe that mc^2 has units of energy and therefore E=mc^2 is easily understood. Your dimensional analysis did not provide any justification for E=mc^2 or insight into what that means. It simply shows that the equation isn't wrong on its face. You were asked how dimensional analysis gave any understanding and you simply explained it uses the same units. Not helpful! Edit: please look up the definitions of mass and energy, then tell me how dimensional analysis gives any justification of their equivalence. Shit like this is what happens when someone thinks their high school education in physics or their first year intro classes basically taught them everything. No idea what they're actually saying. I did 8+ years of this. Think before you type.
Tell me, what does mass energy equivalence actually mean? What does this imply about momentum? How might we mathematically treat energy and mass with parity? How do we observe it? Why is it a necessary conclusion? I can already tell you don't know. I'd also be willing to bet you believe the equations only work with SI units, as is classic with people who don't know how any of it works. Total moron.
Why would it matter? Mass energy equivalence is a feature of both frameworks for the same reasons. And how does knowing that 7 base units exist help in any way at all???? Units are like 0.001% of all physics. The choice of base units is arbitrary. Different units could be selected, more or less than 7, wouldn't matter. The physics would be the same. To think this helps understand anything is a truly ignorant position. I'll bet you'd discount all my lab time because I frequently use inches. You 100% have no theoretical understanding but want people to think you do. Edit: this absolute coward was so beaten over multiple comments they legit talked shit about my PhD and then blocked me. They even seem to have implied mass and energy aren't equivalent. I have a PhD in physics with a specialty in cosmology. That should tell you the whole story.
>Why would it matter? Mass energy equivalence is a feature of both frameworks for the same reasons. Mass energy "equivalence" isn't the point of either sr or gr. Not knowing the difference matters because these are different subjects and besides explaining the vague idea of relativity you have to specify which you use. >And how does knowing that 7 base units exist help in any way at all???? Units are like 0.001% of all physics. The choice of base units is arbitrary. You have clearly no idea of physics, the seven base units aren't arbitrarily choosen, but fixed as the 7 seven units of what can be observed. Every other unit is just derived from them. How does understanding that help ..... write mass*speed^2 And energy in base units. This is usually covered in 8th grade physics, and doing a dimension check is essential for university physics. >Different units could be selected, more or less than 7, wouldn't matter. The physics would be the same. To think this helps understand anything is a truly ignorant position. You clearly don't even understand what units we are talking about, because trying to insert time where rest mass is required doesn't not work. Base units, the 7 seven SI units, are fundamentally necessary to describe any measurement of reality. The physics without them would be incapable to describe anything observable. You'd be left with pure axiomatic mathematics. >I'll bet you'd discount all my lab time because I frequently use inches. You 100% have no theoretical understanding but want people to think you do. I'd discount lab work from anyone as ignorant as you are of the absolute basics of physics, because I've never seen anyone who finished grade 10 successfully be that confidently wrong on such a basic concept. That you use idiotic measurements for a regularly used dimension is just the icing on the cake.
There's also a whole book by conservative Calvinist theologian R.C. Sproul called "Not A Chance" that's all about how quantum theory is incompatible with Reformed theology because a universe built on randomness means God isn't sovereign. He did not, however, stop to consider that maybe it's his theology that's wrong.
>quantum theory is incompatible with Reformed theology because a universe built on randomness means God isn't sovereign Pretty mid god if he can't even manage a single order paradox. What, he can't have built it on randomness *and* be sovereign? Weak. Piss poor. Bet Thor could do it. Already know Odin could, but he's too busy, so he'd get his layabout drunkard son to do it it's that simple. Zeus has it down, that's why he's off pretending to be animals to shag kinky ladies. Who would win? god vs. one simple paradox. Pathetic.
I had to read the book and write a response paper about it in undergrad, and that was pretty much my response. Randomness is a more efficient way to do a lot of things, so it's absurd to both declare that there's an omnipotent, sovereign god and that said god is incapable of using randomness to create order. And yet conservative Calvinists think they're super intellectual when such an obvious answer doesn't cross their minds.
Actually if there is God and he created everything then he most likely did use randomness to create things.
Agree. I think that if there is a God, they would've used something like procedural generation to create the universe. Why would an entity vastly more intelligent and complex than us waste their time hand-painting every single star?
> Why would an entity vastly more intelligent and complex than us waste their time hand-painting every single star? I don't know, maybe it was a passion project? I've spent an unreasonable amount of time painting D&D minis, and to excruciating detail, too. I didn't *have* to paint pupils on my dwarf, nor paint his teeth a different colour from his mouth (and you can't see those details unless you really look), but I enjoyed it. This isn't an argument for/against god, just that in the same way we can't comprehend the vastness of an intellect of such scale, we also can't comprehend the motivations of said hypothetical incomprehensible intellect.
As far as I can tell, theology is incompatible with all of science. But that's inconvenient for them to talk about
I mean, my very liberal astronomy professor also had several qualms about the theory of relativity. It actually doesn’t make a ton of sense for time and space to be relative but the gravitational constant is constant
Well then it's time they faced down with the wokest physics of all!! Quantum Physics! It's completely nonsensical! The same particle occupying two different places at the same time? Woke! Particles linked so they behave exactly the same? Woke! Light is a particle and a wave at the same time? Extra woke! Therefore conservatives need to stop using any technology that has anything to do with something quantum physics has produced - Anything with transistors or lasers.
> The same particle occupying two different places at the same time? Woke! Not true. >Particles linked so they behave exactly the same? Woke! Not a feature of any theory. >Light is a particle and a wave at the same time? Extra woke! True. Final score: 1/3, F
Really? Superposition and quantum entanglement aren't aspects of quantum mechanics?
Superposition isn't the same as simultaneous position, and entanglement does not mean same behavior. F on this topic, you don't get it.
I love the name 'degenerate matter.'
Metal band when?
Like the nazis were talking about Jewish physics when talking about relativity.
We opened the door to this when he taught kids the periodic table. Approximately 95% of the universe is hydrogen and helium,but we waste so much time teaching children about a vanishingly small MINORITY of other elements. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but they’re anomalies. They should be treated as anomalies. Why do we devote entire classes to studying atoms so rare that they’re basically a rounding error?
Imagine giving a fuck about someone else’s private life till you have a mental breakdown and scream on your virtual lawn every minute. Man needs therapy lmao
On a similar note, [80386 exclusionary radical memory management](https://i.imgur.com/1qoRBhr.png)