Are Debates really winable?

[Darnoc]

Could you define absolute beauty for me, please?

 

I cannot. But as I already said, the fact that we do not know now doesn't include that we will never know. And you still do not get it right. The question "What is beautiful?" has only so many answers, because our definition of "beauty" is flawed and not specific enough, so it allows everyone to have another definition of it.

 

You are of course referring to the philosophy of Aesthetics which tries to answer these kind of questions. The acctual problem is that "beauty" is a general word, not a specific one. In order to grasp its true meaning, we just would have to specify the different kinds of beauty. And that is a hell lot of a work, probably the reason why no one ever tried to do it or, if it was tried, did not succeed.

 

Perhaps the problem is also that we do not have any real definition of the word "beauty". If the definition would be clearer, it would be easier to tell what acctually is beautiful and what is not.

 

But even here, there are similarities. There are things which all humans would call beautiful and other things which would be called ugly. So there are certain points of reference we can use, points on which we can agree upon, even on such a complicated matter like this.

 

You've got that completely wrong. "The sun circles the earth" is a perfectly true statement, if you define the earth as 0,0,0. The equations for the sun's orbit will be a nightmare, and far more complicated than using the sun as 0,0,0, but it's still a valid definition. The only thing modern astronomers discovered was that it's generally easier to work with the system if you use the sun as the center.

 

No, I don't got it completly wrong, I only simplified the problem in order to make my point. Of course I could make a long and boring explanation of how gravity works and about methods of astronomical calculations and why they exist (which, in fact, I am really aware of; Copernicus' real reason to create the heliocentric view was purely to simplify the equations). And I am also aware that the sun acctually does circle earth, because of the laws of gravity which were already formulated by Newton and then explained by Einstein (all material objects gravitate towards oneother; so the sentence "the earth is gravitating towards me" is perfectly valid).

 

And you are absolutly right about the coordinate systems. The position of an object always depends on what 0,0,0 is. Of course, if we take time into the equation, it would be 0,0,0,0. But this would complicate things even further and mostly a coordinate system only describes space and not spacetime. And every calculation in every coordinate system is perfectly valid, like you said.

 

But as I said, one reason for relativity is different view points. If we would define the one, absolute and correct viewpoint, we wouldn't face that problem in mathematics. We could define the universal space-viewpoint in the gravitational centre of the universe, for example. In space-time it gets a little more difficult.

 

And coordinate systems are not reality. They are only methods to describe reality. There is a true reality, altough we may not be entirely sure what it is. It may be easier to do this for physics or chemistry, where have points of reference and where everything follows laws which can be experienced most times. But it is my belief that in time we will have accurate models to describe human emotional behaviour and that we can foretell human reactions (especially reaction of masses) as we can now fortell the movements of masses of molecules.

 

In the post before I said "everything is either true or wrong". And I stand by this. Some things may be true, even tough they seem contradicting in our eyes. Opposites, even paradoxes, can exist at the same time. Perhaps we do not understand how this works in some cases (or rather most cases), but the fact that it does work implies that there is a reason why it does work and that in time we may learn to understand it.

[Peregrine]

Peregrine, This goes back to your everything is just a theory. Why can't you state facts instead of opinions?

 

Since Dark0ne has already accused you of spamming, I'm not sure if this is more of the same or if you really are that illiterate. Everything I have said here is fact, not just my opinion. It is scientifically proven fact that the universe revolves around me. Everything you do is defined in terms of how it is related to me. If that makes you feel insignificant, too bad.

[Abramul]

Peregrine, This goes back to your everything is just a theory. Why can't you state facts instead of opinions?

 

Since Dark0ne has already accused you of spamming, I'm not sure if this is more of the same or if you really are that illiterate. Everything I have said here is fact, not just my opinion. It is scientifically proven fact that the universe revolves around me. Everything you do is defined in terms of how it is related to me. If that makes you feel insignificant, too bad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd hate having to solve the equations for that, but they are doable. Relative frames of reference are a fact, and make local things simpler, but everything else more complicated.

[Akrid]

The sun does make its way around the earth only because the earth orbits it. the sun (if you dont account to the whole galaxy moving) is static, maybe it rotates, im not sure but it does not orbit anything in relation to our galaxy. To say the sun orbits the earth is wrong because it does not sucumb to the earths magnectic pull like the earth does to the sun. The way I see it is the earth has its orbit because of the sun therefore the sun is the parent and the earth is the step child, I weight in more facts that contribute to what the definition of orbit is than thier locations and paths, i belive the forces play a role as well.

 

For exsample if your on a car chained to a spinning machine, and it spins you around simular to the earth orbiting the sun, and all the rotations are the same for agrument sake, then would you say that the machine is orbiting you? the machine is not spining around somthing being pulled to it by a force, the car is. Likewise the Earth is tied to the sun by its gravity, the sun is not tied to anything, it is the center.

[Peregrine]

The sun does make its way around the earth only because the earth orbits it. the sun (if you dont account to the whole galaxy moving) is static, maybe it rotates, im not sure but it does not orbit anything in relation to our galaxy.

 

Wrong. The sun moves relative to any fixed point in space.

 

To say the sun orbits the earth is wrong because it does not sucumb to the earths magnectic pull like the earth does to the sun. The way I see it is the earth has its orbit because of the sun therefore the sun is the parent and the earth is the step child, I weight in more facts that contribute to what the definition of orbit is than thier locations and paths, i belive the forces play a role as well.

 

Actually it does. Gravity works both ways, the force is just as strong in both directions. The only difference is the mass of each object, and how the force affects it. And the sun is not fixed, its movement is just so small relative to the size of the earth's orbit that it can usually be approximated as zero.

For exsample if your on a car chained to a spinning machine, and it spins you around simular to the earth orbiting the sun, and all the rotations are the same for agrument sake, then would you say that the machine is orbiting you? the machine is not spining around somthing being pulled to it by a force, the car is. Likewise the Earth is tied to the sun by its gravity, the sun is not tied to anything, it is the center.

 

Again, you're looking at an approximation of the real system. In your example, both objects are moving relative to each other and to any fixed point in space. It's a good approximation to call the machine the stationary center, and much easier to work with that way, but it isn't absolutely correct.

[Akrid]

Remove the sun and the earth goes flying into space or somthing, remove the earth and the sun will do little I would imagine. Yes i said the sun is fixxed is you dont account for the whole galaxy moving, perhaps i should have said if you dont account for its motion reletive to the galaxy. That motion is not orbiting within our solar system, I belive the sun does not orbit reletive to our solar systems planets. Perhaps our whole solar system orbits or travels but it all stays together as a system as it moves and the sun is the center.

[draighox]

But as I said, one reason for relativity is different view points. If we would define the one, absolute and correct viewpoint, we wouldn't face that problem in mathematics. We could define the universal space-viewpoint in the gravitational centre of the universe, for example. In space-time it gets a little more difficult.

The problem is there is no absolute point of view.

 

 

Remove the sun and the earth goes flying into space or somthing, remove the earth and the sun will do little I would imagine.

From the point of view of the Mars. From the point of view of the Earth, the Sun will fly into space.

OK, there will be no point of view of the Earth, because the Earth will be removed. Lets say, the gravity between the Earth and the Sun dissapears. Then, from the point of view of the Sun, or the Mars, the Earth will fly into space, but from the point of view of the Earth, the Sun will fly into space.

[Peregrine]

Remove the sun and the earth goes flying into space or somthing, remove the earth and the sun will do little I would imagine.

 

Try again. Remove the earth, and the sun will go "flying into space", just at a lower velocity. The fact that you can usually approximate it to zero doesn't make that change disappear.

Yes i said the sun is fixxed is you dont account for the whole galaxy moving, perhaps i should have said if you dont account for its motion reletive to the galaxy

 

See, you're proving my point exactly, and using a defined system that is most convenient for your purposes. The sun moves, but you set it as stationary and define everything else as moving relative to it to simplify your work.

That motion is not orbiting within our solar system, I belive the sun does not orbit reletive to our solar systems planets.

 

Wrong. The sun moves because of gravitaitonal influence from the planets, just not very much relative to the size of the orbits. So for most models, you can approximate it to zero to make your work easier.

Perhaps our whole solar system orbits or travels but it all stays together as a system as it moves and the sun is the center.

 

Again, that's just an approximation. The center of the system is actually a point in space, and is not the same as the center of the sun.

[Abramul]

Ser Peregrine, I believe it would be more fruitful to demonstrate using the Terra/Luna system, since the orbital perturbations of the larger body are more pronounced.

 

http://library.thinkquest.org/29033/begin/orbitwobble.jpg

 

The sun acts on the earth and its moon as one entity with its center at the barycenter. Since the earth revolves around the barycenter, which in turn orbits the sun, the earth follows a wobbly path around the sun. This is illustrated in the following example. To complicate things further, the barycenter is not always in the same place due to the elliptical nature of the moon’s orbit.

 

Bear in mind, this is still simplified. The actual path would be more squiggly, since the orbital period is more like 10-12 per year.

[KzinistZerg]

I tend to think of the coordinate idea as a general analogy for another mathematical idea: Ax`2 (read A times X squared) has the same shape no matter what number A is, I believe. It's a matter of zoom. So your zoom determines your view of it, but you're still saying the same thing. A different equation, hmmm?

 

X squared at 1" to 1 unit scale looks the same as .1X squared on a 1" to 10 unit scale.

 

Same thing with exponential growth and decay, I believe.

 

Essentially; It's your point of view/lanuage/whatever that determines how a picture comes out. Think of a rainbow colored ppicture where certain filters are applied and different pictures come out.