What Happened To This Forum?

[Dubbelosix]

Laurie,

 

How many times have you heard the cranks say, against relativity, ''let's call a spade a spade?''

 

I am now using their own psychology against them. If you don't like it, complain to the mods my dear.

[sanctus]

Admin note: back on topic please, otherwise thread will be closed. Because the 3 of you (you know who you are) are not at all discussing at all what happened to the forum, but just fighting...

[Dubbelosix]

Admin note: back on topic please, otherwise thread will be closed. Because the 3 of you (you know who you are) are not at all discussing at all what happened to the forum, but just fighting...

 

Indeed, but I am fighting for the sanctity of the site, I don't want to see this place run by cranks. But, I understand and apologize. I will not say anything more on the fighting side, because I am aware of it.

[fahrquad]

Admin note: back on topic please, otherwise thread will be closed. Because the 3 of you (you know who you are) are not at all discussing at all what happened to the forum, but just fighting...

 

Please do close this thread.  It has long since degenerated from Saxon's original valid question into a "WWE Smackdown".

[rhertz]

 

GAHD, those good old 'growth' days LOL :) . When I first joined hypography Tormod was running the site, there seemed to be a lot more interesting general discussions going on and there was a wide variety of people involved in both the theoretical and practical aspects of science.

 

There was also a like function that went haywire during one of the pre 2010 updates so that may go some way to explain the early 'growth' days. If I recall correctly, on average, I received one like for every 2 posts before the like count 'grew'.

 

 

Here are the current 'ratings'. ;)

Name             Likes    Posts    Likes per post


GAHD             74975    10486    7.15

LaurieAG         34605    1479     23.4

Exchemist        622      2507     0.25

VictorMedvil     74       1092     0.07

farquad          68       1101     0.06

Dubbelosix       81       2485     0.03

Marcospolo       10       476      0.02

SaxonViolence    1        298      0.01

 

Hi, LaurieAG.

 

I just was looking at VictorMedvil profile, and was reading about its posts and topics when I found this one.

 

As I only write in Mathematics and Physics, because I'm not fluent in English (not my native tongue), I wasn't aware of this post.

 

I read my profile, where there are registered 213 posts and 32 likes, what gives a ratio of 0.15 likes/post.

 

I'd like to ask why my name is not on the list.

 

Thanks in advance for your answer.

[rhertz]

I'm new in this activity of posting at forums with physics, electronics and technology in general. I started early this year,

as I'm not used to write online, nor I use social media.

 

I began trying at Quora, with their 200 million members (as they say) but it's a question and answer site, which prevent

debates. I lasted at Quora a month, because I found it exhausting to follow, as the more likes you have, the more their

algorithms invade your space with questions of any kind, even when I specifically marked my preferences in two branches.

 

Also, it's  an ego-driven site where you advance in their ranking as more questions you ask. Intrigued by this mechanism,

I searched about who founded Quora and its policies. I found that it was created by two drop-offs of FB, which solved some

doubts about the intrusive behavior of the site. People post over there for any reason, and no question is a dumb question.

But it forces the topics to be more and more compartmentalized, with fields which increasingly overlap.

 

The last issue to make me to unsubscribe was to find that you can BUY credits, in order to escalate an arbitrary ranking.

 

Then I made a general research about science forums in different languages, and I found that the concept of "forum to

hold debates" is a dying concept. With very few exceptions (this site and a couple more in two languages), most of them

followed the trend to became "question oriented", to prevent debates. You can only make a question or answer one.

 

I've found that many disenchanted persons created blogs (free or with a small fee), which them promotes and have a

section for comments, which allow them to make some money aditionally.

 

But the real killer of forums is the monetization policy of YouTube, which drove "science" channels creation up to infinity.

 

Then, by now, most of the momentum passes by the comment section of those "science divulgation" channels, which

help the channel creators to make video after video, pursuing money. It's sick to watch and disgusting to read.

 

I think that forums like this one is, and I'm sorry saying this, reliques from a past time when serious debates (even between

pro and against positions in relativity, quantum physics and cosmology) could take place between educated/civilized people.

 

Since trolling and shilling became a profession (plus spamming by bots) in the last decade or so, the pure spirit of debate

morphed into mockering and name-telling. Then, Moderators act and make a killing, which forces some renegades to reappear

under other nick and the cycle begin again.

 

And finally, after decades of posting about critical topics (remember alt-channels?), the same topics are being repeated after

a while by a new generation of posters, while the old posters retreat and switch to other channels of expression.

 

This is my humble opinion about science forums: same topics under debate for a decade or more, monetization and the search

of populated sites with high traffic, looking for some abstract kind of fame through artificially constructed rankings.

[marcospolo]

and I am only asking for rational answers to the problems I see with Einsteins relativity, thats all. I pose what I see is a problem, and ask for it to be "solved" but only get called a crank.

I use this forum because I have not recieved any solutions from other sites.

So does this mean that there is no solution to my questions?

I think that there is no solution, so I challenge Relativists directly. Why beat around the bush?

Edited June 5, 2019 by marcospolo

[Dubbelosix]

I'm new in this activity of posting at forums with physics, electronics and technology in general. I started early this year,

as I'm not used to write online, nor I use social media.

 

I began trying at Quora, with their 200 million members (as they say) but it's a question and answer site, which prevent

debates. I lasted at Quora a month, because I found it exhausting to follow, as the more likes you have, the more their

algorithms invade your space with questions of any kind, even when I specifically marked my preferences in two branches.

 

Also, it's  an ego-driven site where you advance in their ranking as more questions you ask. Intrigued by this mechanism,

I searched about who founded Quora and its policies. I found that it was created by two drop-offs of FB, which solved some

doubts about the intrusive behavior of the site. People post over there for any reason, and no question is a dumb question.

But it forces the topics to be more and more compartmentalized, with fields which increasingly overlap.

 

The last issue to make me to unsubscribe was to find that you can BUY credits, in order to escalate an arbitrary ranking.

 

Then I made a general research about science forums in different languages, and I found that the concept of "forum to

hold debates" is a dying concept. With very few exceptions (this site and a couple more in two languages), most of them

followed the trend to became "question oriented", to prevent debates. You can only make a question or answer one.

 

I've found that many disenchanted persons created blogs (free or with a small fee), which them promotes and have a

section for comments, which allow them to make some money aditionally.

 

But the real killer of forums is the monetization policy of YouTube, which drove "science" channels creation up to infinity.

 

Then, by now, most of the momentum passes by the comment section of those "science divulgation" channels, which

help the channel creators to make video after video, pursuing money. It's sick to watch and disgusting to read.

 

I think that forums like this one is, and I'm sorry saying this, reliques from a past time when serious debates (even between

pro and against positions in relativity, quantum physics and cosmology) could take place between educated/civilized people.

 

Since trolling and shilling became a profession (plus spamming by bots) in the last decade or so, the pure spirit of debate

morphed into mockering and name-telling. Then, Moderators act and make a killing, which forces some renegades to reappear

under other nick and the cycle begin again.

 

And finally, after decades of posting about critical topics (remember alt-channels?), the same topics are being repeated after

a while by a new generation of posters, while the old posters retreat and switch to other channels of expression.

 

This is my humble opinion about science forums: same topics under debate for a decade or more, monetization and the search

of populated sites with high traffic, looking for some abstract kind of fame through artificially constructed rankings.

 

wow... just wow. When I think a wall of word salad couldn't be dressed enough, there is always one more crank outdoing another.

[marcospolo]

wow... just wow. When I think a wall of word salad couldn't be dressed enough, there is always one more crank outdoing another.

I'm amazed how confused your brain clearly must function.

You apparently read the long, but considered, an honest post of hertz, but somehow in your twisted brain, all you can get out of it is one word, "crank".

 

You are now cleraly revealing just who is the crank here.

[Dubbelosix]

I'm amazed how confused your brain clearly must function.

You apparently read the long, but considered, an honest post of hertz, but somehow in your twisted brain, all you can get out of it is one word, "crank".

 

You are now cleraly revealing just who is the crank here.

 

Since you clearly do not have me on ignore, then maybe you would like to read my good bye thread. You, and your other monikers, including others with a dash of disrespect from moderators, have led to me leaving the place. I feel compelled to answer you, because I know this will make you excited. You will no longer have to tolerate me, because I will no longer tolerate the ignorance at the site.

Edited June 6, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[marcospolo]

Since you clearly do not have me on ignore, then maybe you would like to read my good bye thread. You, and your other monikers, including others with a dash of disrespect from moderators, have led to me leaving the place. I feel compelled to answer you, because I know this will make you excited. You will no longer have to tolerate me, because I will no longer tolerate the ignorance at the site.

Well nobody is happy that an active poster is leaving this forum. Variety is the spice of life.

You could disarm the imagined situation by simply realizing that everybody who does not agree with you is not necessarily a crank.

You could for instance, simply try to solve the challenges to your pet theories, instead of ignoring the challenges, and hiding behind claims that any contrary opinions are the work of an evil consortium of cranks, out to destroy all that is good and divinely correct.

Edited June 6, 2019 by marcospolo

[Dubbelosix]

Well nobody is happy that an active poster is leaving this forum. Variety is the spice of life.

You could disarm the imagined situation by simply realizing that everybody who does not agree with you is not necessarily a crank.

 

What you don't seem to understand though, is I don't mind people disagreeing... its the total disrepect of being told one thing and completely ignored by the same person. I have admitted to my mistakes in life, maybe,.... just maybe, you could have the same respect for others who do have more knowledge than you. I don't blame you for not having enough knowledge, I am however blaming you for not even trying to be open-minded that those who spent nearly a quarter of their lifetime understanding relativity, is being treated like white noise.

Edited June 6, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[marcospolo]

What you don't seem to understand though, is I don't mind people disagreeing... its the total disrepect of being told one thing and completely ignored by the same person. I have admitted to my mistakes in life, maybe,.... just maybe, you could have the same respect for others who do have more knowledge than you. I don't blame you for not having enough knowledge, I blaming you for not even trying to be open-minded that those who spent nearly a quarter of their lifetime understanding relativity, is being treated like white noise.

Well, maybe if you had explained where I was wrong, and failed to understand, using your quarter of a lifetime's knowledge, I would believe you. But you dontanswer the actual problems raised.

Its just that simple.

 

Ill try one last time to request that you explain how relativity can be possible:  No math is required, this is simple Physics.

 

THE DILATION OF TIME CONUNDRUM

Two unmoving spaceships: A & B are the same distance from an observation point C.

The observer at point C sends a signal in both directions which will reach A & B after the same

amount of time. This signal thus starts both spaceships moving simultaneously.

Both spaceships accelerate identically and reach the same high velocity on their way to point C.

This velocity is close enough to the velocity of light so that they should apparently be

significantly affected by time dilation according to the principles of Special Relativity.

http://www.flight-li...pter xxvii.pdf

 

At the precise point that they pass by C, both spaceships send a signal which is the measurement

of the time on their own clocks to reach point C. These signals are marked AT & BT in the

second diagram.

Both spaceships are in a state of perfect symmetry from the perspective of C.

It is therefore clear regardless of the exact value of AT & BT, that these measurements of their

respective times (including any time dilation) will be equal to one another at the point of passing

C, from the observation point of C.

Thus AT = BT when perceived from the observer at C.

However the signals sent out are also both received by the other ship!

So A receives the signal BT, and B receives AT. There will be a very small delay in the time

that it takes the signals to pass between the ships. Seeing as the measurement is taken before the

signal is sent (as they both symmetrically pass by point C) this will not affect the actual

measurement, and thus the signals sent will be identical.

Both ships each will therefore be able to see that the times of their flight are such that BT = AT

when they arrive at point C.

We do not need to specify any values to see that despite a large effective velocity between A &

B, that there can be absolutely no effective time dilation between A & B!

This proves that time dilation due to relative velocity as specified in the Special Theory of

Relativity can only be a logical and empirical impossibility!!

 (clipped from www.flight-light-and-spin.com)

 

Relativists need to step up and show how SR still can work.

 

IF your knowledge is superior than mine, which is very possible, then where is the evidence of that?

 

You should be surely able to totally explain where my simple questions have exhibited error.

 

But you dont try to do that.

[Dubbelosix]

Well, maybe if you had explained where I was wrong, and failed to understand, using your quarter of a lifetime's knowledge, I would believe you. But you dont answer the actual problems raised.

Its just that simple.

 

And i have explained before, my time is valuable. I shouldn't need to reply, no one is that important to insist that others should do so. I have also explained, if you put in nothing, you will get nothing. This isn't because I am incapable of crunching down statements, its just that... I have more valuable things on my hands right now. My friends child is dying of cancer ... and in-between this, I am supposed to be on holiday right now. Again, I don't have time to go through elongated errors. My time, is very special to me and I won't be wasting time to crunch down on erroneous statements. I have a life as well.

[LaurieAG]

Hi, LaurieAG.

 

I just was looking at VictorMedvil profile, and was reading about its posts and topics when I found this one.

 

As I only write in Mathematics and Physics, because I'm not fluent in English (not my native tongue), I wasn't aware of this post.

 

I read my profile, where there are registered 213 posts and 32 likes, what gives a ratio of 0.15 likes/post.

 

I'd like to ask why my name is not on the list.

 

Thanks in advance for your answer.

 

No offense intended rhertz,

 

I initially posted the stats only for the members who had contributed to this thread. The second listing included long term members on my friends list who don't post here that often anymore. I did it to hi light that I was not big noting myself as comparing the statistics of post 2010 members is unfair when compared with longer term members, even if they no longer post here.

 

Probably the most effective/efficient way to regulate trolling on this site would be to restrict recidivist trolls to their own separate area on this forum, where they should stay until they can prove that they are worthy of communication with other non troll members. That way moderators only have to identify trolls, who are quite obvious by their mode of behavior, and anybody who is genuinely interested in science can continue without the endless abuse, bs and waste of bandwidth.

[marcospolo]

And i have explained before, my time is valuable. I shouldn't need to reply, no one is that important to insist that others should do so. I have also explained, if you put in nothing, you will get nothing. This isn't because I am incapable of crunching down statements, its just that... I have more valuable things on my hands right now. My friends child is dying of cancer ... and in-between this, I am supposed to be on holiday right now. Again, I don't have time to go through elongated errors. My time, is very special to me and I won't be wasting time to crunch down on erroneous statements. I have a life as well.

That's fine.  Everyone has to have a life.

So I am not insisting that you, personally address my questions. Any Relativists is welcome to do it.  But as this is a Science forum, someone should be able to find the time to address my concerns.

[exchemist]

I am not preforming a professional diagnosis outside of my field of expertise on someone I don't know.  I just posted a link that I found interesting.  8P

BTW, Bipolar disease is know called NPD.

You mean Bipolar Disorder, surely? This seems to be unrelated to NPD, from what I read. Is that what you meant to say? 

Edited June 6, 2019 by exchemist