Message from @Firefly

Discord ID: 322227440883728386


2017-06-08 04:06:02 UTC  

They are made by people who does not think in correct way.

2017-06-08 04:06:16 UTC  

The results are correct.

2017-06-08 04:06:25 UTC  

That is speculation.

2017-06-08 04:06:48 UTC  

Relativity is partly correct.

2017-06-08 04:06:56 UTC  

Partly incorrect.

2017-06-08 04:07:05 UTC  

Of course.

2017-06-08 04:07:10 UTC  

That is why you can see confirming evidence.

2017-06-08 04:07:23 UTC  

As some part of the theory is correct.

2017-06-08 04:08:25 UTC  

I agree. No theory can be 100% accurate.

2017-06-08 04:08:52 UTC  

But relativity theory is incorrect in its essence.

2017-06-08 04:09:23 UTC  

It states all things are relative.

2017-06-08 04:10:02 UTC  

But they are not only relative. Things also are determined and self-driving.

2017-06-08 04:10:14 UTC  

They are both relative and not.

2017-06-08 04:13:02 UTC  

Einstein is of Judaistic tradition of relativity.

2017-06-08 04:13:22 UTC  

It puts individual in absolute.

2017-06-08 04:14:02 UTC  

Same roots has the catholic priest

2017-06-08 04:14:52 UTC  

Basically, complete relativity is idealism.

2017-06-08 04:15:05 UTC  

I don't understand what you mean by 'things also are determined and self-driving', where is the mathematical theory for that? More speculation, and again with the religion...

2017-06-08 04:16:05 UTC  

@Deleted User Is there a mathematical theory to work outside of the mathematical abstractions?

2017-06-08 04:16:45 UTC  

Do you have a better idea?

2017-06-08 04:16:48 UTC  

It is a subject of philosophy.

2017-06-08 04:16:57 UTC  

Logic

2017-06-08 04:17:07 UTC  

Dialectical Logic even better

2017-06-08 04:17:42 UTC  

But you said earlier that logical deductions are subjective and not based on current observations...

2017-06-08 04:18:05 UTC  

@Deleted User They can be subjective. Some subjective is more objective than the other.

2017-06-08 04:18:10 UTC  

Some is very objective.

2017-06-08 04:18:15 UTC  

@Deleted User @Firefly#9983 You're both talking about different things, one is using philosphy to describe their definition of relativity, while the other is using mathmatics and physics

2017-06-08 04:18:20 UTC  

you're never gonna agree

2017-06-08 04:18:54 UTC  

@Deleted User Consensus is my mortal enemy.

2017-06-08 04:19:17 UTC  

@Deleted User it would makes things boring, yeah

2017-06-08 04:19:20 UTC  

@Deleted User Lenins work was based on that. And it worked.

2017-06-08 04:21:53 UTC  

I would like to see how logic can be objective or subjective. Sometimes logic is applied to practical things, sometimes not. But neither is less logical.

2017-06-08 04:22:16 UTC  
2017-06-08 04:22:32 UTC  

Conventional logic is limited.

2017-06-08 04:22:57 UTC  

It is also used in dialectics.

2017-06-08 04:24:50 UTC  

I don't think one is better than the other.

2017-06-08 04:26:44 UTC  

I think conjecture of what could be should always be welcome, but at the end of the day practicality is all you can actually go off of

2017-06-08 04:27:14 UTC  

I think we are done here.

2017-06-08 04:28:10 UTC  

sure

2017-06-08 04:29:03 UTC  

@Deleted User One is included in the other.