>Be unable to even explain how magnets work.
youtube.com
Is civilization going to collapse under the fake nukes, quantum theory, reproducibility crisis, math magician, string theory nonsense?
Is Bill Gaede /our Science guy/?
youtube.com
>Be Jüdische Physiker
Cameron Watson
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
globalresearch.ca
reddit.com
thecrimson.com
youtube.com
archive.org
feynmanlectures.caltech.edu
quora.com
quora.com
twitter.com
Hudson Cruz
youtube.com
At 1:20 he gets into the 'you're not smart enough to understand' explanation, just like plagurist Einstein and the rest do when you ask a simple question.
Austin Reed
I hate Richard Feynman so much
>How do magnets work
>what do you mean
>how do magnets work?
>I uh...what the fuck do you mean they repel each other?
>No shit you squirming jackoff now WHY do they do it
>OH. Oooooh okay...well...excellent question..but you see propblems happen when you ask why
>aunt minnie slips on ice
>still doesn't explain what magnetism is
>I'm not going to be able to tell you the cause because it's too complicated for you to understand
>except to sit here in this chair and repeat the premise of your question over and over "yes they do indeed attract".
Fucking retard. "Magnets attract and I have absolutely no clue how they do it" was a perfectly acceptable answer given that ABSOLUTELY NO ONE DOES NO HOW THEY WORK. But no, they always pretend to know.
Jackson Price
>>aunt minnie slips on ice
Hey, listen, Goy. You're like an alien asking about minnie when you ask a (((Physiker))). You couldn't possibly understand the mental herpes I've built up around the questions of physics, so just go take out a loan or something.
Camden Clark
Also:
>Bill Gaede the tech stealing spy who betrayed our country by stealing tech for cuba.
Unfortunately he explained it better then Feynman or another physicist moron, and he even elaborates that descriptions aren't explanations. Unfortunately he's still explaining what it does not what causes it.
Nathan Gomez
>Unfortunately he's still explaining what it does not what causes it.
Didn't know about Cuba.
If he was bigger I would think he was controlled opposition.
At this point I think certain secret societies/ technocrats know much much more about physics than they're telling us... like the other 30 major things they lie to the "surplus humans" about.
How can a society with such advanced technology have such retarded non-explanations for everything?
When did the universe start? What was before it?
How far does space go? What's outside it?
Adrian Nguyen
Yeah right?
A magnet is nothing other than a coherent dielectric object. There is absolutely no difference between an unmagnetized chuck of ceramic iron and and magnetized one other than COHERENCY. All that occurs is the atoms align themselves allowing for the "space" of "flow" to pass. Whatt is this "flow"? It's a pressure mediation and there is a disparity between north and south which reacts in the same way you'd expect meshing gears to work. Spin the "gears" (field pressures) working against each other and they "repel", "mesh" them and they draw each other in. This is not "attraction" nor "Repulsion". This is on par with what the Greeks (including plato) said about how load stones, and and everything is mutually impelled by another.
They literally say/explain this somewhat in Timeaus: "nothing in reality of attraction takes place: but, as a vacuum cannot anywhere be found, and these particulars mutually impel each other"-80b.
So what "causes it"? It logically has no specific cause which givers rise to self-similarity and the holographic nature of magnets. Split a magnet and it makes more, there is no center of a magnet.
But if you really want more detail, look at the works of "Ken Wheeler".
Thomas Rodriguez
FUCKING MAGNETS REEEEE
William Roberts
>When did the universe start? What was before it?
That's the joke. There is none and magnetism proves it.
>split magnet
>another forms
>forever
>this implies a start and end
Why do you think a magnetic field has a "hole"?
>How far does space go? What's outside it?
Outside of what? That makes no sense either. There is no "outside" of "what is".
Juan Adams
what's that pic from?
Blake Wood
Quantum is aryan, jews hate quantum
Luis Cox
"materials acting coherently as one"- is not a force by the way. Nothing is "causing" a force to happen. it's just a mediation of what is coherent vs what isn't.
If I pressure wash rocks am I going to blow away the light lava rock stones or the big coherent and dense piece of granite? I'll never move that granite.
If I melt all those lava rocks into a dense piece of obsidian then I've made the lava rocks more "coherent". All I've done is changed the form they're in
Same with ice steam and water. It's all water in a different form.
Ryder Watson
Brayden Parker
Colton Murphy
>trying to understand quantum mechanics without understanding the mathematics
well no shit he can't explain it to laymen, physicists can't tell you what's going on without going into the math.
Asher Morales
In fact, geomancy explains magnetism better than any backward ass unicorn fairy particle. Lets take "feng shui" for example.
>Move all your furniture out of the fucking way so that you *CAN* "flow" better in your house
>align furniture coherently along walls and hallways leaving longer straight paths for you to traverse.
>any little piece of furniture in the way will impede you
>substitute the furniture with iron filings and you as the "not iron filing (flux)
>This is somehow a force
>This is physical interaction even though the goal is not come in physical contact of the furniture.
Joshua Nguyen
Alright, what predictions can "geomancy" make? Can it accurately predict measurable phenomenon?
Andrew Perez
Ian Price
...
Connor Garcia
Parker Wood
> Replacing virtual photons with virtual ropes is somehow more scientific than the other...
Both are brainlets but at least Feynmann was inspirational.
Jaxson Martin
>well no shit he can't explain it to laymen, physicists can't tell you what's going on without going into the math.
Correct. They actually assume something is "there" to be quantified, even though the driving "force" behind it is literally an absence aka "the donut hole" of the magnet.
>try and reify an absence for centuries
>fail miserable because you forgot it was a fallacy to do so.
>call every step you take towards it a "particle"
>claim the "particles" actually exist
Even though you have no empirical evidence of such nonsense. A disparity will NEVER EVER be reified AS SOMETHING because it defeats the purpose of it being a "disparity". It is not something "specific"
>there is no "hot" without "cold"
>There is no "wet" without "dry"
Disparities are not dualitites though since you are referring to "some singular thing" as having a "disparity". There is no limit to "hot" or "cold", it's just "a quality". This is why "fields" have no "quantity" to be measured. They have NO ORIGIN, no CARTESIAN LOCUS. You are not dealing with something that can be simply described using coordinates because what you're dealing with is responsible for the UNMANIFESTED, the UNKNOWN.
Kayden Johnson
>it's too complicated for you to understand
it kind of is. And kind of isn't. Quantum effects are hard to understand, because it's kind of made up. It's pure mathematics. How can something physical be mathematical equations? Why is the world on the tiniest level mathematical equations? this is stupid
Nathan Morales
this thread made me curious, I'm gonna spend the next 10 minutes googling how magnets really really really actually fucking work
Jackson Cooper
haha yea
i also came up with teh rope hypothesis. and yea.
he did a recent video on that extinction and economy
they screw all of nature up to support their counterfeiting
youtube.com
also i found this and it was everythign i was thinking
globalresearch.ca
Michael Hill
the Las Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock, worked at Morton-Thiokol from 1985-1988. They are the company that made the O-ring component that was found to be at fault for the Challenger disaster in 1986.
reddit.com
Morton - Thiokol: Getting Off Easy | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson
thecrimson.com
10 Dec 1986 - Morton-Thiokol manufactured the booster rocket which caused the space shuttle Challenger to explode last January, killing seven astronauts, ...
Hudson Smith
>Can it accurately predict measurable phenomenon?
Has magnetism ever been accurately predicted or "measured"? The field is not even physical to begin with and a Gauss meter won't even tell you the difference between the center and the edge of a magnet.
Geomancy is not a measurable phenomena, just like magnetism,. Everything is the exact same quantitatively, you've only oriented it towards a standard of measure you invented yourself.
That isn't a force (it is absent of force)
That isn't quantifiable (because no quantity has fucking changed)
That isn't a cause (because it doesn't actually "cause" something to happen)
So no it's not "measurable". Because there is nothing quantitatively different about it. Unless you think that "orientation" is a force, which it isn't.
>structure and order are a force
No they aren't because they're an attribute that something else has. It's like saying "hot is a force". No it's a quality that something has.
John Jones
Learn quantum field theory.
Asher Rogers
he does. ropes. ropes are how light teh mechanisms of light. that is how you apply everything else. if you got a better answer go for it retard. but it works with everything.
t. retards
that doesnt explain it.
>fuckkkkk
youtube.com
Ian Peterson
Yeah, he was a cocksucker.
Andrew Flores
i mean all the counterfieters go about causing these things with their minions, its like one gigantic cult that was allowed to prosper in america because of the counterfieting being done. and people dont point at it as the problem. no matter what happens they act like you cant nkow or nothing can be done because of muh counterfieters.
as far as i heard and seems like to me, challenger was faked
you can find some astronauts that look exactly like them, still alive today. i see they do this as threats to people to try to scare them into going along with them
Levi Jones
>it kind of is. And kind of isn't.
Then he shouldn't be sitting in a chair pretending to know something.
>Quantum effects are hard to understand, because it's kind of made up.
Exactly. You said it better than I could have
>It's pure mathematics. How can something physical be mathematical equations? Why is the world on the tiniest level mathematical equations? this is stupid
It is stupid! All based on the assumptions that these particles exist. They count the effects and actions of something AS something separate from reality which is a psychosis.
archive.org
Start here. Basically the only person who wrote a book in great detail about magnetism. Yeah a lot of others did, but they never explained it as well as Ken.
Walter Russell also wrote an interesting book, but it doesn't cover magnetism in great detail so much as light and electricity and whatnot.
Brayden Carter
>Correct. They actually assume something is "there" to be quantified, even though the driving "force" behind it is literally an absence aka "the donut hole" of the magnet.
What the FUCK are you talking about?
Go learn some math and physics to understand what they're actually talking about and then maybe you find a way to question this stuff that isn't akin to a pidgeon playing chess.
>Has magnetism ever been accurately predicted or "measured"?
Yes. Just stop already, you're making a fool out of yourself.
Jayden Jones
>ropes
Ah so 550 paracord is gonna light my bedroom? "Ropes" "of what".
>this video
>forceforceforceforece
Nothing is "forced" though, it's mediated by what's already present.
>the river that is creates more "force" than the river that is curved
But the form of the river isn't the cause of the force. If the rivers were empty they would exhibit the same "force" as each other. All it is is LESS RESISTANCE for the water to travel by...
Less resistance=/=force
Again it's like moving furniture out of the way and saying it "causes a force".
Noah Cox
>ken wheeler donut vortex hypothesis
oh wow look at that vortex of free infinite energy spiraling. oh wait it LOCKS on itself in real life
do you know what a rope is? its a concept but stands for something. that explanation is the mechanisms of light.
Sebastian White
Feynmann was the bigger kike fraud since Einstein, stealing the hard work of others and arrogantly attacking anyone who dared to call him out for it.
He can't answer how magnet works because he doesn't fucking know. HE LITERALLY DOES NOT KNOW. Dyson could answer this question in five minutes, satisfy your curiosity, and forever change your view of the world. THAT is a physicist. This kike is a fucking fraud.
Lucas Ortiz
>What the FUCK are you talking about?
>Go learn some math and physics to understand what they're actually talking about and then maybe you find a way to question this stuff that isn't akin to a pidgeon playing chess.
>Muh light is a wave/particle duality
even though a "wave" is what something else does and is not an actual "thing", and there's no empirical evidence of a particle. These morons actually believe that something induced to exist has a "speed".
>prove these particles that have no empirical evidence don't exist.
Okay...and done.
>Yes. Just stop already, you're making a fool out of yourself.
Answer it. You won't. You'll sit here and piss and moan about how I don't know what to count what you don't even know how to count. Which would be a "field" by the way. Tell me what causes a field and how it exists, I fucking dare you.
Blake Gray
>Indoctrinate yourself to my cult to understand it.
Woosh, maybe leave this conversation for the big boys
Hudson Jackson
>oh wow look at that vortex of free infinite energy spiraling. oh wait it LOCKS on itself in real life
>free infinite energy
Oh, you mean the part where he said "mother nature doesn't deal a free lunch"? It that the "vortex of infinite energy" that you claim he said? Do you even know what "vortex" is?
>do you know what a rope is
The universe is not made of nylon and hemp, sorry you druggy.
>that explanation is the mechanisms of light.
"rope" does not explain something that is induced to exist. Where does the action of the rope come from? What is the cause? It's the same as saying "magical bumping particle does this".
Elijah Harris
The bigger fraud is the assertion gravity and the electrostatic aren't related when their fundamental forms are nearly identical.
Both have waves, both have a magnetic component.
One is obviously a general case of the other and any fucking Jew physicist who claims otherwise needs to be gassed.
Grayson Cooper
>the Las Vegas shooter,
No shots were fired in Vegas, schlomo.
Post evidence a shot was fired.
Wyatt Scott
>Richard Feynman
feynmanlectures.caltech.edu
His lectures are documented such as the one on magnetism. Has anyone bothered to look at it? Diamagnetism is explained within it but the point of the video clip only demonstrates that certain answers may not be good enough for certain peoples. He said they repel but the reporter wanted a more detailed answer which is hard to give without a formal lecture and a background in basic mathematics and physics (which I assume most people who watched the clip lacked).
Justin Fisher
>action
implying force.
do you know how a rope works? the 2 strands strain against each other. its a tension.
Chase Campbell
take your meds
Angel Flores
>implying force.
>what something does is a force
No it's an action. Its "thinking" a force?
>do you know how a rope works?
stands wound together to make a coherent stronger strand. Made of physical matter.
>the 2 strands strain against each other. its a tension.
Correct. A tension of "rope". What is the "tension" of magnetism "made of"? If it isn't made of anything "physical" then comparing it to a rope is a false equivalency. Does a rope perturb itself? Fold in on itself? No? Why? What? This thing called a "physical limitation" comes into play? Huh, not with magnetism.
Because it ISN'T PHYSICAL. Yes you can say there's a connection between the point" and "it's similar to hoe a rope works", but that doesn't tell me how it actually works. It quantifies it and makes an assumption. It doesn't tell me where the "fields" comes from. It doesn't tell me why there's a "connection" between the rope ends. It's exactly like saying "they repel each other" only you replaced the word "repel" with "rope".
>Ill be able to quantify what I can't even explain
Not science.
Brandon Brown
This guy definetely have a point
quora.com
quora.com
very interesting. I hate abstarct math
David Perry
"Waves of what" you fucking dumbshit. Where's the empirical evidence of a particle?
>oh well this one dipshit who changed what he thought an "electron" was in order to get a nobel said "electrons exist".
>Another "proved" so by levitating oil drops in a magnetic field, assumed there was a "particle" and accounted for yet another unexplained force dubbed "gravity" so he could control and figure out the mass of using electromagnetism.
>Yes, using a non physical field that still lacked explanation during the time he levitated oil drops on a certain area of the planet and somehow equated the oil as to having "particles" with "weight" inside them
>and then the standard of measure was changed numerous times throughout history after that
>because we learned to control electromagnetism better
>which again is not physical
Stupid.
Also:
>Maxwell equations totally tells us what a "Field" is and not what it does/it's effect over a given period of time.
Wonder what would happen if "distance" and "time" meant absolutely nothing and were not even real when it comes to the mechanics of the universe. I guess we'll never know because dumbshits will forever count perturbations of fields "as something" that's particular.
>actions are things
>things cause forces with no explanations
>assumptions are great foundations to a theory.
Only if you're a physicist working in clown world.
Nathan Garcia
I didnt say something that does something is a force. you said the rope is ligth and weres the action from.
implying gravity
light is a tension. its a rope and it acts by tensioning the rope. not a force, how quantum explains gravity. that it pulls. or pushes. actualy quantum doesnt have an explanation for the force of pull or push.
its functions as a tension though, through a rope. and a rope is an extended entity
Asher Robinson
i was never less afraid of you faggots than now, after reading this thread
Nathaniel Cruz
If you can't explain it to a layperson than you don't really understand it yourself.
Theoretical physics went up its own arsehole thanks to Niels Bohr, he was so enamored with complication and esoteric nonsense that even Einstein called him out on his bullshit. He's the reason modern physics is infested with the concept of "shut up and calculate", it's leads to incredibly accurate predictions but no real deeper understanding on the true nature of things
Lincoln Flores
This right here. Einstein was a Jew, but he was one of those weird ones that other Jews don't like because he had an affinity for natural law.
Lucas Williams
Do you guys have a interesting books on physics?
feynman lectures already read
Aaron Perez
Let me guess, another jew babbling about useless unverifiable nonsense who wins tons of awards handed out by other jews but in practice can't answer simple physics related questions?
Mason Rogers
>t. Zoomer
Isaiah Williams
Nolan Murphy
Magnetism and gravity are both particle flows. As the particles rush in toward it's center, overcrowding occurs and the particles are ejected outwards. Rinse and repeat.
Tyler Cox
>be barely slightly above average, just barely
>think you're a genius
There's this really cool forum for smart people like yourself, check out reddit dot com
Ayden Anderson
>attracts things by throwing balls at them
yea that is a good explanation of the mechanism of gravity and how things fall down and also explains why they dont fall up
Jack Davis
>Nukes are fake
I wish they were
Colton Anderson
TIL you can get pussy by babbling around your area of expertise instead of answering straight
Levi Edwards
EM isn't a particle.
Cameron Moore
>t. brainlet who failed high school physics
Brayden Young
If you can't explain it in layman's terms, you don't really understand the mechanisms. The question is easily answerable and I have no doubt that he could answer it sufficiently, yet chooses to be a brat instead. Pretty annoying.