Could A Good God Permit So Much Suffering?

3:30 in Ohio will always be 3:30 in Ohio

you're on some useless shit.
Time in Ohio runs slightly differently than time does in high Earth orbit.

That's why GPS satellites have to be programmed with relativistic corrections. Otherwise your GPS location would incrementally incur errors and would be way off within a few hours or days.

There was never a promise made to you that physics would be easy. A good basic knowledge of the framework of physics are only available to people who had some physics background in college, or those who are well read in popular science books and science journalism.
 
Time in Ohio runs slightly differently than time does in high Earth orbit.

That's why GPS satellites have to be programmed with relativistic corrections. Otherwise your GPS location would incrementally incur errors and would be way off within a few hours or days.

There was never a promise made to you that physics would be easy. A good basic knowledge of the framework of physics are only available to people who had some physics background in college, or those who are well read in popular science books and science journalism.
that's telemetry calculations.

the orbit circumference is different on a geo orbital satellite versus the surface of the earth.

nothing to do with relativity lies.
 
So, unable to refute my statement that the behavior of matter and energy is lawful and predictable, you instead elected to masturbate and play some word game about Issac Newton.
Great pivot to going off the deep end.

Newton's insight was not the law of gravity.
Newton's law of gravity was certainly Newton's law of gravity. If you are electing to masturbate and to play some word game about what isn't the law of gravity, please find one that wastes less time and bandwidth.

Aristotle knew gravity was lawful and cause-based.
You don't speak for what Aristotle knew. In fact, you don't speak for any dead people.

Newton's insight was that there is a universal law of gravity that explains both motion on Earth and in the heavens, based on an inverse square relationship.
Yes, which is what everone has been telling you. I guess you are only now getting around to accepting it.

Newton's law of universal gravitation is no longer strictly correct,
Newton's law of gravity is still strictly correct. I have given you the correct answer. You aren't smart enough to figure it out ... even when it has been told to you.

and has been replaced by the field equations of general relativity.
Nope, it has been accompanied by General Relativity.

However, Newton's 17th century inverse square law still gives excellent approximations,
Newton's law gives correct answers. You have to use the right tool for the right job.

and can be used in undergraduate physics classes,
It can be used by engineers to build things, because like all other science, it has not yet been found to be in error in any way. Perhaps you have noticed that Newton's law of gravity has not been discarded from the body of science, which it would if it were only giving (erroneous) estimates instead of correct answers.

or for sending probes to Mars.
For sending people to Mars you would want Einstein's model. I explained why previously; hopefully you were paying attention.

Newton's inverse square law really starts to give incorrect answers in the presence of extremely dense mass and/or for objects moving at relativistic speeds.
Newton's law of gravity assumes a single reference frame. Once you have multiple reference frames, you want Einstein's model. If you have only one reference frame, you certainly do not want to be using Einstein's model if you can help it.
 
that's telemetry calculations.

the orbit circumference is different on a geo orbital satellite versus the surface of the earth.

nothing to do with relativity lies.

C'mon, dude, this is understood by everyone. GPS involves relativistic calculations.

Don't be an idiot. EVERYONE except you seems to know this. Everyone has seen the experiment where they put an atomic clock on a jet and flew it to prove that time dilation exists.

Don't make stupid arguments. C'mon. You can do better and if you can't the STFU, please.
 
Time in Ohio runs slightly differently than time does in high Earth orbit. That's why GPS satellites have to be programmed with relativistic corrections.
GPS satellites require much more than mere programmed corrections.

Otherwise your GPS location would incrementally incur errors and would be way off within a few hours or days.
GPS satellites need regular "synchronization" from ground stations. Even then, there is no way to guarantee a perfect synchronization between different reference frames.

There was never a promise made to you that physics would be easy. A good basic knowledge of the framework of physics are only available to people who are willing to put in the effort to learn and who will not reject correct information out of hand because of some mental allergy to the truth. Having existed through some college courses or having read popular science fiction books/journalism is not sufficient to realize what science teaches.
 
C'mon, dude, this is understood by everyone. GPS involves relativistic calculations.

Don't be an idiot. EVERYONE except you seems to know this. Everyone has seen the experiment where they put an atomic clock on a jet and flew it to prove that time dilation exists.

Don't make stupid arguments. C'mon. You can do better and if you can't the STFU, please.
but not general relativity calculations.

fact.

you;re dumb
 
but not general relativity calculations.

fact.

you;re dumb

Dude, c'mon, you just look like a moron when you take these "anti-science" positions. I get it. It's a game you are playing, you are playing "edge lord" today but you picked the wrong thing to be an edgelord about.

Might as well argue that 2+2 doesn't equal 4. You would look exactly as intelligent.

Slow your roll, pick your battles and try to have a decent conversation. All of JPP is nothing but a cess pit and these science conversations are literally the ONLY place someone can speak for more than 2 posts without it being stupid. You always fuck up every thread you enter for the same reasons.

Sit this one out please?
 
Dude, c'mon, you just look like a moron when you take these "anti-science" positions. I get it. It's a game you are playing, you are playing "edge lord" today but you picked the wrong thing to be an edgelord about.

Might as well argue that 2+2 doesn't equal 4. You would look exactly as intelligent.

Slow your roll, pick your battles and try to have a decent conversation. All of JPP is nothing but a cess pit and these science conversations are literally the ONLY place someone can speak for more than 2 posts without it being stupid. You always fuck up every thread you enter for the same reasons.

Sit this one out please?
general relativity has no bearing on telemetry calculations.
 
general relativity has no bearing on telemetry calculations.
picard-facepalm.gif
 
Great pivot to going off the deep end.


Newton's law of gravity was certainly Newton's law of gravity. If you are electing to masturbate and to play some word game about what isn't the law of gravity, please find one that wastes less time and bandwidth.


You don't speak for what Aristotle knew. In fact, you don't speak for any dead people.


Yes, which is what everone has been telling you. I guess you are only now getting around to accepting it.


Newton's law of gravity is still strictly correct. I have given you the correct answer. You aren't smart enough to figure it out ... even when it has been told to you.


Nope, it has been accompanied by General Relativity.


Newton's law gives correct answers. You have to use the right tool for the right job.


It can be used by engineers to build things, because like all other science, it has not yet been found to be in error in any way. Perhaps you have noticed that Newton's law of gravity has not been discarded from the body of science, which it would if it were only giving (erroneous) estimates instead of correct answers.


For sending people to Mars you would want Einstein's model. I explained why previously; hopefully you were paying attention.


Newton's law of gravity assumes a single reference frame. Once you have multiple reference frames, you want Einstein's model. If you have only one reference frame, you certainly do not want to be using Einstein's model if you can help it.
So, a lot of words, but simply no refutation of three summary points I made:

The behavior of matter and energy are lawful and predictable​

The fact that gravity is understood to be lawful and predictable has been known at least since Aristotle.​

Gravity is motion caused by curvature/geometry of spacetime, not by any classical force.​

 
general relativity has no bearing on telemetry calculations.
Good thing you're not an engineer tasked with designing and maintaining satellites.

Both special relativity and general relativity have to be taken account of in GPS satellites because of time dilation due to motion and time dilation due to gravity.
 
So, a lot of words, but simply no refutation of three summary points I made:
Why are you abruptly changing topics? Why don't you thank me for correcting your rookie errors before we change topics to something else?

The behavior of matter and energy are lawful and predictable​

The fact that gravity is understood to be lawful and predictable has been known at least since Aristotle.​

Gravity is motion caused by curvature/geometry of spacetime, not by any classical force.​

The first two are correct. Your third assertion is bogus. Gravity is a force, not motion. Motion, i.e. kinetic energy, is caused by classical force accelerating a mass. Relativity has something to say about the amount a body is accelerated based on its velocity, but the resulting motion is caused by classical application of a force. Structural engineering, bridge design, and load-bearing analysis all use Newtonian statics exclusively, because Relativity cannot add any corrections when velocity is zero.

You're welcome. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
 
Back
Top