OT - Long range photography..Black Hole BS? - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 406
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Temecula, Ca
    Posts
    2,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1182
    Likes (Received)
    3369

    Default

    200 engineers worked on this for a decade? A new low in the utter waste of taxpayer's money

  2. Likes Dualkit, Pathogen liked this post
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    The more you guys talk - the more you are falling into a "black hole".
    This "science" thing seems to be an issue with you, Joe. I'll put it this way - science, when not disturbed by ego or politics, is self correcting. At its best, science willfully challenges its own dogmas and seeks objective truth. Truth being defined as adherence to laws of physics, proven by experiment and importantly, recreation of the experiments by others.

    Not something most religions can claim...

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Elyria Ohio
    Posts
    1,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3254
    Likes (Received)
    718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    This "science" thing seems to be an issue with you, Joe. I'll put it this way - science, when not disturbed by ego or politics, is self correcting. At it's best, science willfully challenges its own dogmas, and seeks objective truth. Truth being defined as adherence to laws of physics, proven by experiment and importantly, recreation of the experiments by others.

    Not something most religions can claim...
    Science most definitely is a "thing" to me. I love science. However, what I am trying to point out is that most of what passes for "science", is not science. It exists only in the realm of personal belief.

    Science, by definition, is simply "a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject". Like it or not, that includes religion.

    Now, getting back to my question, is this "black hole" a "thing" or "not a thing"?
    Last edited by Joe Miranda; 04-11-2019 at 07:38 AM. Reason: addition

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    Science most definitely is a "thing" to me. I love science. However, what I am trying to point out is that most of what passes for "science", is not science. It exists only in the realm of personal belief.
    You've used the above words in a sentence, but I'm afraid it's not a coherent one.

  6. Likes TeachMePlease, N54 liked this post
  7. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Elyria Ohio
    Posts
    1,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3254
    Likes (Received)
    718

    Default

    Not coherent because it's not to you're liking? This speaks exactly to my point that this "scientific crowd" berates and belittles skeptics.

  8. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,357
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1690
    Likes (Received)
    1796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregSY View Post
    Today's big news was the first photo ever of a black hole.

    Here's my opinion - it's most likely B.S. on the part of dreamers and scientists eager to have something exciting and important in their realm.

    In the astronomy courses I took, the term 'theoretical astronomer' was a commonly used phrase. The professor, who was one, admitted that a great deal of their work was ... theoretical...and had never been proven. Black Holes were part of that.

    A couple years ago I saw a breathtaking photo of some sort of event in outer space. Spectacular colors. Then, if you read further, there was a casual mention that the photo had been 'colorized' to enhance the effect of what we can't actually see. Huh?

    So....do we REALLY have cameras that can photograph anything that far away? Or do we have a bunch of static and 'data' that has been massaged and interpreted by scientists to suit their need?
    Ugh...I guess there are people out there who claim if you cannot take a photograph of something with a specific camera then the phenomena does not exist, I guess you did not consider how the data was acquired and how it was put into a visual representation. Is that tumor in your head real? Is it if only detected on an MRI and not photographed with a Nikon P900?

    answer three questions:

    1. What shape is the earth?
    2. What is gravity?
    3. What is NASA?

    dee
    ;-D

  9. Likes MichaelP liked this post
  10. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    Not coherent because it's not to you're liking? This speaks exactly to my point that this "scientific crowd" berates and belittles skeptics.
    No, not coherent because you say you love science, then disregard all of it you don't understand or agree with. It's like saying "I love ice cream", and then saying "but I hate any that has milk in it".

    In simpler terms - you're one with your ignorance, and nothing will change it. So be it. Not my problem, just a little disappointed your mind's welded shut.

  11. Likes dcsipo, metlmunchr liked this post
  12. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    SE PA, Philly
    Posts
    5,249
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    974
    Likes (Received)
    1717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill D View Post
    Of course it is a fake. A real black hole is so dense that no light escapes from it. The gravity is so strong the light is pulled into it. Since there is no light , or any other radiation, leaving it all you see is nothing. Kind of like a shadow. I think it relates to Plato? and people living a cave only seeing shadows of the outside world. Does the outside world rally exist or is it all smoke and mirrors.
    Bil lD.
    Not exactly, as I understand it. What happens is that near the "point of no return' the gravity is strong enough to pull particles apart. Some of the particle gets sucked in, but the light and radiation caused by the ripping apart of particles escapes. So there is radiation emitted.

    I'm not as skeptical about the image as others. I think its a tremendous technical success. And the colorization just represents a way to include more information (the radiation emitted is a spectrum, just like visual light radiation).

    What amuses me and strikes me as a bit lunatic is the near-religious feelings that the image (apparently) evokes in some writers. "The spirits of Einstein and Hawkings coalesce and magnanimously share the view as our collective soul stares into the infinity of time". That sort of BS. Its science. Unless I'm wrong, there is no "collective soul" nor "spirits" in science.

    I'm neither anti-science (I have a PhD in engineering, for heaven's sake) nor anti-religion. I'm really amused though, when people try to mix them up....

  13. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    5,449
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    457
    Likes (Received)
    2307

    Default

    I expected, as received, the usual "Scientists are like really smart and if you question them you're really stupid" answers. Yawn.

    But my point is well made - the 'photo' (and yes, everyone is calling it a photo) is not really a photo but rather a derivation/simulation/synthesis. It's like having 200 really smart scientists all individually look at an elephant then come up with a computer simulated photo of an elephant. It'll probably look like an elephant but it's not really a real elephant. "Real" being the key work here, my stargazing friends.


    And then we have Science 2019 at work as well. It woulda been better had they a Kardashian involved, but almost as good they've trotted out the perky-titted 29 year old hottie to champion. We used to get grizzled old white guys, now we get the hottie. And she's a woman, too! Why isn't she gay, trans, black and crippled?

    Take away the 'Golly Gee! factor that stimulates certain folks (the subscription list to Popular Science and Pipe Smoker Monthly crowd) and there's slim pickins to this whole thing.

  14. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,357
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1690
    Likes (Received)
    1796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    Not coherent because it's not to you're liking? This speaks exactly to my point that this "scientific crowd" berates and belittles skeptics.
    Has nothing do do with ones liking. Scientists are skeptics by definition, Theories are just theories, the community has to convince itself based on empirical data. You can have a theory that postulates anything until the theory has been independently verified or reproduced, it is just your belief. Einstein's theory of relativity was just a theory for many years until many experiments verified his mathematical predictions. Your statements show incredible levels of confirmation bias.

    dee
    ;-D

  15. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bosleyjr View Post

    I'm neither anti-science (I have a PhD in engineering, for heaven's sake) nor anti-religion. I'm really amused though, when people try to mix them up....
    Just remember, if I don't understand or agree with your stress analysis and the equations that lead up do it, then it can't possibly be right...

  16. Likes bosleyjr, Mcgyver liked this post
  17. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,846
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    923
    Likes (Received)
    1977

    Default

    I have never seen or felt an x-ray photon. I have never seen my hip joint nor has anyone.

    I am confident my hip joint” is a thing.” I know a lot about my hip joint due to a CT scan of that joint—-all “manipulated” data based on insensible x-rays. Colorizing the results shows vessels, ligaments, cartilage, muscle in spectacular detail.

    Of course, the images are just “theoretical” and simply show what some over-educated physicists (and I am sure overpaid by our wasted taxes) want to believe is real. Waste of time and money! And colorized their imaginary images to boot! Bah humbug.


    Denis

  18. Likes SAG 180, dcsipo, MichaelP, mountie, yardbird liked this post
  19. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregSY View Post
    It woulda been better had they a Kardashian involved, but almost as good they've trotted out the perky-titted 29 year old hottie to champion. We used to get grizzled old white guys, now we get the hottie. And she's a woman, too! Why isn't she gay, trans, black and crippled?
    Dude. You have issues. Ones that this community isn't skilled at dealing with.

    But heck, that's never stopped us before! I'll happily listen to a PTH if they can convey what they've done, why they did it, and the methods used with clarity. I'm not a physicist (but I've worked with them), but that doesn't stop me from TRYING to understand what they're going on about.

    It's called learning. We've been doing it for millennia. With luck, we've got many more years ahead to learn more.

  20. Likes dcsipo liked this post
  21. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Dickman View Post
    200 engineers worked on this for a decade? A new low in the utter waste of taxpayer's money
    Amazing that you typed that out and got it uploaded to the Web on a stone tablet. Using one of those new Wi-Fi chisels, eh?

  22. Likes dcsipo, Mtndew liked this post
  23. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Elyria Ohio
    Posts
    1,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3254
    Likes (Received)
    718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsipo View Post
    Has nothing do do with ones liking. Scientists are skeptics by definition, Theories are just theories, the community has to convince itself based on empirical data. You can have a theory that postulates anything until the theory has been independently verified or reproduced, it is just your belief. Einstein's theory of relativity was just a theory for many years until many experiments verified his mathematical predictions. Your statements show incredible levels of confirmation bias.

    dee
    ;-D
    Scientists are skeptics by definition. Where did you get that definition? I have NEVER read that as a definition of a scientist.

  24. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    2,994
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1762
    Likes (Received)
    1989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    And what you are suggesting is not an aspect of "faith".
    My dad always said the first thing to learn about a subject is the vocabulary.

    The ‘Subject’:

    The English language:

    faith
    /fāTH/
    Learn to pronounce
    noun
    1.
    complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
    "this restores one's faith in politicians"
    synonyms: trust, belief, confidence, conviction, credence, reliance, dependence; More
    2.
    strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
    synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination, persuasion, religious persuasion, religious belief, belief, code of belief, ideology, creed, teaching, dogma, doctrine
    "she gave her life for her faith"


    Here’s the thing.
    I am ignorant about just about everything.
    I have to take it as a article of faith that there are folks who know stuff I don’t.
    I literally couldn’t drive down the road if I didn’t have faith in everything from the chemist who vulcanized the tires to the machinists who make the engine.
    That “faith” doesn’t make me a religious zealot.
    It makes me a pragmatist.

    I believe that accepting scientific findings is simple pragmatism.

  25. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL/WI border
    Posts
    3,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    964
    Likes (Received)
    885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    Just remember, if I don't understand or agree with your stress analysis and the equations that lead up do it, then it can't possibly be right...
    And all those nice colored stress distribution pictures are nothing but another attempt to full us. Apparently, engineers are not better than scientists in this respect. All those people do is stealing taxpayer's money and pretending they know something.

  26. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelP View Post
    Apparently, engineers are not better than scientists in this respect. All those people do is stealing taxpayer's money and pretending they know something.
    You fool! Now that it's all printed out for anyone to read we're doomed!

    Dooooomed, I say!

  27. Likes MichaelP, dcsipo liked this post
  28. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1526
    Likes (Received)
    4457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    Scientists are skeptics by definition. Where did you get that definition? I have NEVER read that as a definition of a scientist.
    Maybe expand your reading list?

    Climate Science Investigations South Florida - The Nature of Science

  29. Likes dcsipo liked this post
  30. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL/WI border
    Posts
    3,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    964
    Likes (Received)
    885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Miranda View Post
    Where did you get that definition? I have NEVER read that as a definition of a scientist.
    "Intelligence is the ability to understand and learn well, and to form judgments and opinions based on reason"(c)


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •