George Hammond writes:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:30:46 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:34:46 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

Besides, I'm here to read about and discuss physics. You can help by
taking your proof-of-God hallucinations someplace more appropiate, perhaps
alt.stupidity, or better yet, the nearest dumpster.

1. The "Relativistic Anthropi9c Principle" is
manifestly a Physics Subject.

Nope, it's your unsupported rantings and delusions. For it to be physics
(or any science) you have to follow the Scientific Method, which you have
not. Do you even know what the Scientific Method is?

2. I'm a graduate physicist.

I would certainly hope you'd know what the Scientific Method is, if this
was actually true. Perhaps you need a reminder.

Look at http://www.sciencebuddies.org/mentor...c_method.shtml
and follow that colored flowchart on that page. Apply it to your "SPOG"
claims. I don't know about the first two steps, but at some point you
reached the "Construct Hypothesis" step (yellow). Note the word
"hypothesis". The next state is "Test with an Experiment". Did you do
that? No! Next is "Analyze Results". How can you do that without an
experiment? What you did next was "Jump to Conclusion" (not Draw
Conclusion) and went to "Hypothesis is True" and "Report Results" step
by blathering it here. Except, of course, there are no 'Results' so
you replace that step with "Blather Hypothesis" instead. Since you
have no results to analyze, you skip the 'false/partially true' path
and try again. Nobody gets it perfectly right the first time so every
hypothesis will go around the loop a few times.

Now what many people, including myself, have done is take your ideas as a
hypothesis and testing it. For example, you blather something about 13
eigenvectors=13 gods (whatever that means). We all point out the fact the
Greeks had a Dodekatheon with only 12 gods. Oops, off by 1. You /should/
follow the "partially true/false" path, modify your Hypothesis and try
again. But no, you want to cheat and go straight for the finish, and get
mad that we point out your cheating the scientific method.

So, if you want anyone serious about physics to _ever_ take you seriously,
you'll have to follow the scientific method. You'll have to come up with
some sort of test or experiment (green on chart) that when evaluated fairly
esp. by other scientists, will either agree or disagree with your
hypothesis.

Now if you are in the least bit worthy of a BS in physics, you'll fully
understand this and agree with it, and will go off to come up with some
sort of tests of your hypothesis. The best tests to come up with are
ones that will _disprove_ your hypothesis, and if it has merit, these
tests will _fail_.

A good example is Einstein and GR. He said that gravity bends light.
Classic theory has no effect on light by gravity. He came up with an
experiment. Observe a certain star during an eclipse. Einstein said that
if he's correct, that star will appear at a certain spot because its light
was bent by the sun. If classical theory is correct, it'll appear at a
different position. Very straightforward, and it was tested during that
eclipse.

Hence, I'm not going anywhere.

Come back when you have tests of your hypothesis.

I suggest you quit posting off topic, ad hominem spute, and,
get the f--- off this thread. High school moron.

You can't defend yourself or your hypothesis so you again report to
cursing and namecalling. That only shows you know how weak your support
is.

If there's no scientific method to SPOG, it is what's off topic
in a science group.