Flat Earth Theory Contradictorly Argued by Physics.

[Eodnhoj7]

Argument

1. Their is a movement arguing the earth is "flat". It is small and has existed in various grades for a long time.

2. Respectively the "round" earth movement shares a similiar paradigm.

3. The "round earth" movement is shared by physicists primarily, however physics is currently moving towards the claim all reality is 2 dimensional; thus necessitating the earth is flat and modern science is a projection of human understanding reflecting a dogmatic viewpoint similiar to the Catholic Church it condemns.

Thoughts?

[Frank N Stein]

What happened to that awesome explanation by Philosopher? I was going to congratulate him

[Eodnhoj7]

What happened to that awesome explanation by Philosopher? I was going to congratulate him

You will have to explain your point, I am not getting it.

[Logik]

Argument

1. Their is a movement arguing the earth is "flat". It is small and has existed in various grades for a long time.

2. Respectively the "round" earth movement shares a similiar paradigm.

3. The "round earth" movement is shared by physicists primarily, however physics is currently moving towards the claim all reality is 2 dimensional; thus necessitating the earth is flat and modern science is a projection of human understanding reflecting a dogmatic viewpoint similiar to the Catholic Church it condemns.

Thoughts?

Is spacetime curved or flat? The answer to this question (whatever it is) has absolutely no f****** implication on our day-to-day life/decision-making.

Humans will find any reason to discriminate against one another. Of all the pathetic reasons to discriminate on - I can't roll my eyes far enough when it comes to semantics.

You don't think/speak like me BAAAAAAAAD!

[Frank N Stein]

What happened to that awesome explanation by Philosopher? I was going to congratulate him

You will have to explain your point, I am not getting it.

Nothing to explain. Philosopher's post was here, and then it was gone. He explained why a 2D holographic universe doesn't mean a 'flat earth'.

[Eodnhoj7]

Argument

1. Their is a movement arguing the earth is "flat". It is small and has existed in various grades for a long time.

2. Respectively the "round" earth movement shares a similiar paradigm.

3. The "round earth" movement is shared by physicists primarily, however physics is currently moving towards the claim all reality is 2 dimensional; thus necessitating the earth is flat and modern science is a projection of human understanding reflecting a dogmatic viewpoint similiar to the Catholic Church it condemns.

Thoughts?

Is spacetime curved or flat? The answer to this question (whatever it is) has absolutely no f****** implication on our day-to-day life/decision-making.

Humans will find any reason to discriminate against one another. Of all the pathetic reasons to discriminate on - I can't roll my eyes far enough when it comes to semantics.

You don't think/speak like me BAAAAAAAAD!

Actually because of our concept of reality provides the framework for modeling our pragmatic nature through technological innovation...it does completely.

[Logik]

Nothing to explain. Philosopher's post was here, and then it was gone. He explained why a 2D holographic universe doesn't mean a 'flat earth'.

It does and it doesn't!

In mathematics you can transform equations from one form/paradigm into another.

Isomorphic mathematical formulas can have identical consequences/implications even though they have different form.

Because they are isomorphic their utility is identical. Even though their aesthetic/forms are vastly different

[Eodnhoj7]

What happened to that awesome explanation by Philosopher? I was going to congratulate him

You will have to explain your point, I am not getting it.

Nothing to explain. Philosopher's post was here, and then it was gone. He explained why a 2D holographic universe doesn't mean a 'flat earth'.

Well its gone, so I can't tear it apart can I ?

Actually 3 dimensionality can observe "depth" as merely a continual state of change in 2dimensional structures continually converging/diverging.

A 2 dimensional structure does not necessitate an absence of 3 dimensionality, but rather what we considering as "round" effectively being an everpresent state of "change".

I argue this in "Viewing all as Shallow" which observes a perceptual argument for a flat reality.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=25478

[Eodnhoj7]

Nothing to explain. Philosopher's post was here, and then it was gone. He explained why a 2D holographic universe doesn't mean a 'flat earth'.

It does and it doesn't!

In mathematics you can transform equations from one form/paradigm into another.

Isomorphic mathematical formulas can have identical consequences/implications even though they have different form.

Because they are isomorphic their utility is identical. Even though their aesthetic/forms are vastly different

True, we are left with "inversion" as a foundation phenomenon within all measurement.

[Logik]

Actually because of our concept of reality provides the framework for modeling our pragmatic nature through technological innovation...it does completely.

To the person designing/operating the GPS network - it totally makes a difference.
To the person designing the LIGO experiment - it totally makes a difference.
To the person designing the navigation systems for airplanes - it totally makes a difference.

To Joe Contrarian who has nothing better to do with his life - it's a reason to pick on others.

[Logik]

If I had nothing better to do with myself, I might just embark on a mission to derive euclidian equations which equivalent predictive utility as the current stuff we have.

And the flat-earthers will celebrate!

[Eodnhoj7]

Actually because of our concept of reality provides the framework for modeling our pragmatic nature through technological innovation...it does completely.

To the person designing/operating the GPS network - it totally makes a difference.
To the person designing the LIGO experiment - it totally makes a difference.
To the person designing the navigation systems for airplanes - it totally makes a difference.

To Joe Contrarian who has nothing better to do with his life - it's a reason to pick on others.

Actually it does, because physics has turned itself into a religion of technological tyranny. All the technology built upon its framework, as well as its "pragmatic utility" is just...well irrational.

[Logik]

Actually it does, because physics has turned itself into a religion of technological tyranny. All the technology built upon its framework, as well as its "pragmatic utility" is just...well irrational.

I have no such objections to technological advancement.

But I do object to conceptual/predictive models being deified as Truth and used as a tool for social ostracism.

[Eodnhoj7]

Actually it does, because physics has turned itself into a religion of technological tyranny. All the technology built upon its framework, as well as its "pragmatic utility" is just...well irrational.

I have no such objections to technological advancement.

But I do object to conceptual/predictive models being deified as Truth and used as a tool for social ostracism.

The fact we are discussing this over a computer rather than face to face is social ostracism...that is all technology does: Ostracize and quantify people into categories. It dissolves the human condition and tears it into pieces.

[Logik]

The fact we are discussing this over a computer rather than face to face is social ostracism...

False dichotomy.

If it wasn't for computers/internet - do you think you and I would be having this conversation at all?

The face-to-face option has not been taken away from us.
Only an alternative (that didn't exist 50 years ago) has been added.