Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
My post is the best post ever?
I hate to say this, but one of the best posts ever.
And whoever denies this does so to deny the fact that they feel stupid for not thinking of this before.
I don't care dude. I am right until proved wrong, and even then, I am probably still right.Do you ever stop slinging bullshit that you can't prove around?
I don't care dude. I am right until proved wrong, and even then, I am probably still right.
I don't care dude. I am right until proved wrong, and even then, I am probably still right.
My post is the best post ever?
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html
You are guilty of phallic phallacies.
Stop dicking around.
I don't care dude. I am right until proved wrong, and even then, I am probably still right.
You suck until you can prove that you don't suck. And even then, you're probably knghenry.
No no no.I agree that the description on that site is pointless from a practical stand point it seems to be done purposefully to try and confuse and perplex, but you can't possibly argue the point that string theory and higher dimensional theories have no relevance.
You can only tie gravity and electromagnetism together through use of higher dimensional geometry where you have a 5th dimension at the very least.
Any other model although tested physically, classical, quantum, etc does not do this and cannot unify the forces, particle physics however is nearly there at verifying higher dimensional particles with the search for higgs bosons.
Everything fits nicely when you introduce atleast one higher dimension, you cannot dismiss it as bullcrap for this simple reason, it's naieve to do so if you place any value on understanding the interaction and relationship of forces as a whole.
No no no.
I have absolutely no problem with having 11 dimensions, in fact I believe it.
However I believe, as those physicists who developed this theory do that these are geometric spacial dimensions. In that flash, they are not geometric spacial dimensions. They are just silly little things, crap to fill a book with. No science behind it really.
Absolutely.
Are you sure?
Let me introduce you to my friend kathakasung...I choose to exercise my right to be gullible, so I believe everything you said. I am sure of that.
I don't like how you used 'only' there.Gravity is only a theory as well tbh...
Gravity is only a theory as well tbh...
It's actually easier to get your head around Time being "the 4th dimension" than it is to think about 4 spatial dimensions. It's a total mind screw to think that a 4d being would see the world in 3d, i.e. be able to see all of the faces of a cube simultaneously as well as that what is contained with in it.
When you have evidence to back up your theory, it becomes a method. Then you try to incorporate unexplained facts into your method (if there are any). If you fail, you must try to find a new theory. If not, carry on using the same method.
k?
Wikipedia said:The fourth dimension is often identified with time, and as such is used to explain space-time in Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity. In this case, the concept of an additional spatial dimension would be referred to as the fifth dimension.
you guys got to calm down - and recognize my jokes =p
A theory can be anything really. but a scientific theory is what has been tested to the hardcore end and can't currently be disproven.
I am not a 4 dimensional being and I can see all the faces of a cube simultaneously as well as what is contained within it, provided that the faces of the cube are transparent or translucent enough to allow me to distinguish its contents and its other faces.
In this case
It's not a theory.
There are theories within Quantum Mechanics and String Theory, that contradict that guy completely, they have evidence and are theories.
That website is rubbish.
OK, a completely opaque cube without the use of mirrors or any other trick. Stop being so anal. And even if the cube is translucent you're still seeing it in 2D since you'd be viewing it using a 3D perspective rather than in 3D itself.
You also forgot to highlight the operative phrase in your quote zleppelin
Aenema said:but forth dimension is time,right?
Wikipedia said:The fourth dimension is often identified with time, and as such is used to explain space-time in Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity. In this case, the concept of an additional spatial dimension would be referred to as the fifth dimension.