CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Science & Math discussion thread

Science & Math discussion thread

Started by ironmarlin1 · · 👁 5 views · 27 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants ironmarlin1hollowtrucker77Dennis Rogers6Matthew Anderson4Joseph Watson3Chris Mitchell11Timothy Jackson2
Joseph Watson3 Joseph Watson3 Active Member
98 messages
joined Mar 2012
#21 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:So, if that’s the case, then what exactly qualifies as a trivial answer?
So, are we actually going to sit here and debate whether an apple tossed into the air is always going to be dragged back down by gravity, or are we just going to pretend that physics is optional today?
You could probably spin the exact same story eighteen different ways if you felt like wasting the breath, but at the end of the day, it’s still the same damn thing—well-known, measured, documented, and theorized to death.

A trivial answer would just be saying, "it happens because of the law of conservation of momentum." But once you explain that law using a deeper principle—like the one mentioned above—it stops being trivial.

Besides, Emmy Noether didn't become famous for some trivial result—not in an era before affirmative action and gender quotas were even a thing. 🙂
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#22 ·
ironmarlin1 said:hollowtrucker77, honestly, that little "objection" you’re raising applies to about 90% of the discussions we have over on the PZ forums anyway. Besides, the moderator didn't even cite that as the reason for the decision. I really don't see why you're standing up for such an absurdly foolish way to shut down a thread, especially when it's just going to end up migrating right back here as some even more chaotic off-topic mess. 🤷

I'm not defending anyone
the mods can look out for themselves
I'm just trying to clear things up in the meantime, acting as an outsider looking in
it's not like I have to be right, and I'm certainly not insisting on it
I'm just attempting to lay out how the situation looks from a somewhat neutral perspective
ironmarlin1 ironmarlin1 Active MemberOP
196 messages
joined Aug 2007
#23 ·
Look, I get it, really, I do—playing devil's advocate and all that bit of intellectual gymnastics... 😁
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#24 ·
Yeah
it’s incredibly ungrateful, so I wouldn't recommend it if I were you
🙂
ironmarlin1 ironmarlin1 Active MemberOP
196 messages
joined Aug 2007
#25 ·
Am I actually going to receive a response explaining exactly how this topic fails to meet the subforum's guidelines?
Dennis Rogers6 Dennis Rogers6 Member
34 messages
joined Apr 2008
#26 ·
Endimion17 mentioned that if anyone wants to open up a discussion regarding his own business, they should probably go ahead and run it by Timothy Jackson2 first.
Timothy Jackson2 Timothy Jackson2 Member
24 messages
joined Jan 2009
#27 ·
This thread is staying closed. Look, my patience isn't infinite. This whole section has turned into nothing more than a shouting match for self-proclaimed "philosophers," and this particular discussion was heading straight down that rabbit hole—just a playground for wannabe intellectuals to tear each other apart. Oh, did the term "mental tug-of-war" offend someone? Well, honestly, it’s the most accurate way to describe what's been going on here for over a year now. Even though I really feel like all these threads should be locked away, I’m letting you guys off the hook without any formal penalties this time. It seems like if I close just one topic, there's an immediate revolution... Okay, clearly this is a sign that I need to be a bit firmer and less lenient, because when you let everything slide, people start filing appeals just because a single thread gets shut down.

Best regards.

p.s. hollowtrucker77, I hope that clears things up, so please go ahead and lock the thread.
Dennis Rogers6 Dennis Rogers6 Member
34 messages
joined Apr 2008
#28 ·
Oh, please, what on earth are these phantom philosophers haunting you with? We are talking about an actual physical law here, for heaven's sake. 😁
I truly believe it should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that this topic doesn't violate any of the subforum rules; even Timothy Jackson2 implicitly confirmed that himself just now.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads