ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 15th April 2019, 06:41 AM   #121
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,233
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
There's quite a long post being shared around on Facebook which describes exactly how Katie Boulger contributed. I've shared it, but the original post was made by someone named Misty S. Boyer, and it's got citations.
The Facebook post reprinted in an Indian newspaper;

https://www.telegraphindia.com/opini...ge/cid/1688787
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 06:51 AM   #122
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,197
So she led a team that contributed one important piece of the puzzle?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 06:12 PM   #123
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 61,156
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
So she led a team that contributed one important piece of the puzzle?
Essentially, yes. But she also developed a key algorithm (CHIRP), without which the many images from multiple telescopes could not have been stitched together.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 09:48 PM   #124
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,827
All I got to say is that all the people outraged that a single person didn't do everything all by themselves are going to be hugely disappointed when they research the history of a great many important inventions normally attributed to one person.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 07:46 AM   #125
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,197
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
All I got to say is that all the people outraged that a single person didn't do everything all by themselves are going to be hugely disappointed when they research the history of a great many important inventions normally attributed to one person.
You say that like it's a bad thing to look into claims that one person did it all by themselves.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 07:47 AM   #126
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,615
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Yeah the trolls countered by making about a dozen instagram accounts in her name and in each them had this "confession" where "she" admitted a woman couldn't do such complicated work and stole the glory from the men. They were reported quickly and I think all the imposters are now down.
Ugh, I really don't get why people bother doing something like that. What's the endgame?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 08:05 AM   #127
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
To be honest, I'm starting to also think that it's a case of physicists being like cats: you can see they're intelligent, but they just can't communicate with the rest of us

Saying that an object isn't accelerated in its own frame or chart is rather tautological. Of course it ain't, and that was the case in SR too, and in Newtonian mechanics, and for that matter even in Aristotelian physics. Even in my purely Newtonian example of taking a selfie while jumping off a plane, I'm totally not accelerating -- or for that matter even moving -- in the frame of my camera. I'm absolutely fixed at r=1m in that coordinate system.

I am however totally accelerating in the coordinate system of the guy filming it from the ground. And the transformation between the two coordinate systems would already be curved even in Newtonian mechanics. Talking about following geodesics doesn't change the fact that, yep, I am being accelerated.

GR, far as I understand it, doesn't say that that acceleration is some kind of artefact. It's in fact based on the equivalence principle that says gravity is just acceleration. Yes, space time gets curvy, but it's because of that acceleration between the two coordinate systems.

Ditto incidentally for the example with the two skaters. The acceleration between the two of them is very real. And there is an actual force causing it. It's the difference between the centripetal force vectors that keep them on the surface of the sphere.

Looking at it as purely an artefact of the curvature is misleading for everyone who isn't as fluent in meowing
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 08:06 AM   #128
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,291
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Ugh, I really don't get why people bother doing something like that. What's the endgame?

There is no endgame, trolling is its own reward for people like that.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:19 AM   #129
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,557
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Saying that an object isn't accelerated in its own frame or chart is rather tautological.
Saying that can't be tautological, because tautologies are correct. An object doesn't have any unique "its own frame". When people say that, they probably mean a co-moving frame in which the spatial coordinates of the object are zero, and they are probably also assuming the object is not being accelerated. If that last assumption is being made, an object undergoing acceleration can't have "its own frame".

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Even in my purely Newtonian example of taking a selfie while jumping off a plane, I'm totally not accelerating -- or for that matter even moving -- in the frame of my camera. I'm absolutely fixed at r=1m in that coordinate system.
Apart from acceleration caused by air resistance, you would not be accelerating. You should remember, however, that acceleration is not at all the same thing as being at a fixed position. Whether you are moving is coordinate-dependent, but whether you are being accelerated is not coordinate-dependent.

Consequently, the following statement is incorrect:
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
I am however totally accelerating in the coordinate system of the guy filming it from the ground.
No. If you aren't accelerating in your favored coordinate system, then you aren't accelerating in anybody's coordinate system, unless someone is using an incorrect notion of acceleration. (The confusion comes from the fact that almost everybody's notion of acceleration is incorrect.)

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
And the transformation between the two coordinate systems would already be curved even in Newtonian mechanics. Talking about following geodesics doesn't change the fact that, yep, I am being accelerated.
No, that's quite wrong. If you are in free fall, then you aren't being accelerated---in anyone's coordinate system.

(I don't know what you mean by a "transformation between the two coordinate systems would already be curved", but I assume I can just ignore that.)

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
GR, far as I understand it, doesn't say that that acceleration is some kind of artefact.
Correct. In the general theory of relativity, acceleration corresponds to a world line that is not following a geodesic, which is to say the world line violates the geodesic equation. Whether a world line is a geodesic is independent of coordinate systems.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
It's in fact based on the equivalence principle that says gravity is just acceleration.
That's not what the equivalence principle says. The (weak) equivalence principle says inertial and gravitational mass are equal; a stronger form of the equivalence principle also says a certain class of physical experiments yield the same results in all free-falling laboratories.

Now it's true that the equivalence principle implies that things people often falsely interpret as acceleration are due to the curvature of spacetime, and the fictitious force people often refer to as gravity is one way to interpret the curvature of spacetime, so there is a sense in which the equivalence principle says many of the things people falsely interpret as acceleration are associated with the fictitious force people often refer to as gravity. That's not at all the same as saying "gravity is just acceleration."

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Yes, space time gets curvy, but it's because of that acceleration between the two coordinate systems.
I'm sorry, but "acceleration between the two coordinate systems" makes no sense at all. Spacetime curvature is invariant, independent of any and all coordinate systems.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Ditto incidentally for the example with the two skaters. The acceleration between the two of them is very real. And there is an actual force causing it.
That's all true. Neither of the skaters is in free-fall or following a geodesic. All observers agree on that, regardless of their preferred coordinate system.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Looking at it as purely an artefact of the curvature is misleading for everyone who isn't as fluent in meowing
If you are saying that acceleration, properly understood, has nothing at all to do with curvature, then what you are saying is correct. If you are saying that gravitation has nothing to do with curvature then you are very wrong.

When people speak of gravitational acceleration, they are speaking of a fictitious force that has essentially nothing to do with true acceleration.

Confusion persists because most people continue to believe gravity causes acceleration. That was how Newton conceived of gravity, but it is not true in Einstein's conception of gravity. According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, mass/energy causes curvature of spacetime, and that curvature creates geodesics that Newtonians (incorrectly) interpret as acceleration. That's a cross-paradigm error.
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:25 AM   #130
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,615
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
There is no endgame, trolling is its own reward for people like that.
I kind of get trolls who just poke people to get a reaction. I'll admit that, on occasion, I like poking people who are just obnoxious or unpleasant to others to give them a piece of their own medecine. But this goes above and beyond that sort of behaviour, and I don't see how someone could enjoy doing that. Maybe those people need to be in an institution somewhere, or at the very least very far away from a computer.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:26 AM   #131
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
I'm saying that acceleration is the second order derivative of the position with respect to time. As such I'm pretty sure I can be accelerating in one coordinate system even if I'm in fact stationary in another coordinate system. I'm also pretty sure that the origin of one coordinate system can be accelerating in another coordinate system.

You can explain it via geodesics and coordinate transforms if you like, but it's still acceleration. And you can pick on whether it can technically be called a frame if it's accelerating, but, you know, I can be accelerating with respect to my cat even if I call it a dog
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 16th April 2019 at 09:28 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:27 AM   #132
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,615
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
When people speak of gravitational acceleration, they are speaking of a fictitious force that has essentially nothing to do with true acceleration.
Indeed, and I thank those in this thread for patiently making that clear(er) to me.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:38 AM   #133
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
There is no endgame, trolling is its own reward for people like that.
I would disagree. I think there's a real rise of the good old fashion racism, xenophobia, and misogyny. Or maybe it's always been there, it just wasn't fashionable to say it out loud.

And I think some people aren't just trolling for attention when they carpet bomb every tweet feed and youtube video with laments about how the PC police doesn't let one use the n-word any more, or how women aren't funny, or how unrealistic it is for a woman to just be good with the Force, or how unrealistic and immersion breaking it is to have a woman with a sword in Skyrim or with a gun in BFV, or how all women can't be better at maths than Peggy Bundy. I think a lot of them are just, as a lot of offensive idiots like to call their schtick, "saying what everyone else was thinking." Well, technically what they are thinking, and then projecting on everyone else.

And saying it out loud is kinda their idea of propaganda, really.

And I think dismissing everything disagreeable as just aimless trolling is dangerously naive. You only need to look at how many voted for Trump, or how in Germany the AfD's popularity actually shot UP way back when some AfD idiot said maybe we should shoot at the refugees at the border. A lot of those "trolls" will be voting in the next election, and you may be surprised to learn that it was an honest opinion rather than trolling. And it will bite us all in the ass.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 16th April 2019 at 09:39 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:41 AM   #134
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,291
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I kind of get trolls who just poke people to get a reaction. I'll admit that, on occasion, I like poking people who are just obnoxious or unpleasant to others to give them a piece of their own medecine. But this goes above and beyond that sort of behaviour, and I don't see how someone could enjoy doing that. Maybe those people need to be in an institution somewhere, or at the very least very far away from a computer.

It's really no different from any other kind of attempted bullying, other than the fact that it's occurring in a venue where there are little to no consequences for their actions, thus enabling people to be more vocal and aggressive with their bullying. See the Online Disinhibition Effect.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:43 AM   #135
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,557
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
I'm saying that acceleration is the second order derivative of the position with respect to time.
That is indeed what you're saying.

What I'm saying is that you are using a Newtonian definition of acceleration and pretending your definition of acceleration is consistent with the notion of acceleration implied by Einstein's general theory of relativity.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
You can explain it via geodesics and coordinate transforms if you like, but it's still acceleration.
What it is, still, is a cross-paradigm error caused by your equivocation: the word "acceleration", defined as the second order derivative of position with respect to time, is inconsistent with the meaning of the word "acceleration" as defined in general relativity.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
And you can pick on whether it can technically be called a frame if it's accelerating, but, you know, I can be accelerating with respect to my cat even if I call it a dog
You're talking about coordinate acceleration, which is no more meaningful than coordinate time.
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:47 AM   #136
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
It's really no different from any other kind of attempted bullying, other than the fact that it's occurring in a venue where there are little to no consequences for their actions, thus enabling people to be more vocal and aggressive with their bullying. See the Online Disinhibition Effect.
Yes, but it's still a dangerous assumption that they're only disinhibited to say random offensive stuff for no purpose at all. I'm saying that a lot of them are disinhibited to say something they actually believe. Just because it happens to be horribly bigotted, doesn't mean someone doesn't believe it. And as I was saying, for some of them even something they think everyone else is thinking, they're just somehow too scared of the PC police to actually say it.

Or the shorter version: remember to apply Hanlon's razor. "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 10:03 AM   #137
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
That is indeed what you're saying.

What I'm saying is that you are using a Newtonian definition of acceleration and pretending your definition of acceleration is consistent with the notion of acceleration implied by Einstein's general theory of relativity.


What it is, still, is a cross-paradigm error caused by your equivocation: the word "acceleration", defined as the second order derivative of position with respect to time, is inconsistent with the meaning of the word "acceleration" as defined in general relativity.
Which brings me back to my "just like cats when it comes to communicating" metaphor. Then you're telling Belz that something isn't accelerating, except you're not using the same definition of "accelerating" that he is. By the definition he learned in school, yeah, that stuff still is very much accelerating.

It's like if I were to claim that there is no such thing as a furry cat, except I'm using my own club's secret definition of "furry" there.

I'm not the one causing that cross-paradigm error. You guys have been sneaking in the second paradigm and apparently just assuming that everyone just knows you're talking about a completely different thing.

Not that there's anything wrong with jargon, mind you, when everyone involved understands it. Otherwise, for the rest of the world, you might as well be meowing
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 16th April 2019 at 10:05 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 10:04 AM   #138
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,615
Purrrrrr.....
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 10:11 AM   #139
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,557
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
I'm not the one causing that cross-paradigm error. You guys have been sneaking in the second paradigm and apparently just assuming that everyone just knows you're talking about a completely different thing.

Not that there's anything wrong with jargon, mind you, when everyone involved understands it. Otherwise, for the rest of the world, you might as well be meowing
When discussing black holes, as in this thread, the Newtonian theory of gravitation/acceleration is essentially useless. Folks who'd like to understand the black holes that are the subject of this thread need to let go of their Newtonian preconceptions so they can learn something about the subject being discussed.

I am not accusing you of wishing to understand general relativity. I am just explaining to you why some of the others who read this thread might be interested in the subject.
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 10:16 AM   #140
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
When discussing black holes, as in this thread, the Newtonian theory of gravitation/acceleration is essentially useless. Folks who'd like to understand the black holes that are the subject of this thread need to let go of their Newtonian preconceptions so they can learn something about the subject being discussed.

I am not accusing you of wishing to understand general relativity. I am just explaining to you why some of the others who read this thread might be interested in the subject.
Yes mate, but you need to say so, is all I'm saying. You guys have been using a GR definition on someone who self-admittedly doesn't know any GR. And telling him that something doesn't accelerate, when in fact by the only definition of acceleration he knows it does. That's the equivocation you're looking for.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 10:33 AM   #141
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,615
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Yes mate, but you need to say so, is all I'm saying. You guys have been using a GR definition on someone who self-admittedly doesn't know any GR. And telling him that something doesn't accelerate, when in fact by the only definition of acceleration he knows it does. That's the equivocation you're looking for.
Folks, it's fine. I got the explanation.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 05:44 PM   #142
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 61,156
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Purrrrrr.....
Black holes have no fur.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:24 PM   #143
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,843
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Black holes have no fur.
If Hawking had more time he may have discovered "Hawking fur".
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:38 PM   #144
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
It's really quite simple: the photon goes straight through space, but space is bent. So the photon follows a curved path despite not being directly affected by gravity. At the event horizon space is curved such that there is no possible escape path for photons past that point.
I see.

Our news media was laughable tonight. They were talking about naming the black hole in the center of our galaxy after some guy and they kept showing the new image and saying it was the black hole in our galaxy.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 16th April 2019 at 09:44 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 09:46 PM   #145
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
So what do you guys think about this:

Salon: Scientist who helped image black hole has her credibility questioned by sexist internet mob.
Quote:
A familiar story arc followed. Fake Twitter accounts were set up in her name. Men on Twitter dismissed her scientific contributions as mere feminist posturing. And there was a debate over whether or not she was worthy of a Wikipedia page.
A couple nutjobs? Russian trolls? WTF?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 16th April 2019 at 09:48 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 11:03 PM   #146
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 61,156
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
So what do you guys think about this:

Salon: Scientist who helped image black hole has her credibility questioned by sexist internet mob.

A couple nutjobs? Russian trolls? WTF?
This has already been mentioned in this thread, and to it I say this:

Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
The Facebook post reprinted in an Indian newspaper;

https://www.telegraphindia.com/opini...ge/cid/1688787
Share this widely.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 11:31 PM   #147
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
This has already been mentioned in this thread, and to it I say this:

Share this widely.
Thank you for that. It now makes sense what BS and confirmation bias led to the attack, and I love the last line:
Quote:
So let's take a moment to celebrate the fact that two of the most integral contributors to the first direct photo of a black hole were

a woman

and a gay man.
I will be sharing this.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2019, 11:38 PM   #148
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 61,156
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Thank you for that. It now makes sense what BS and confirmation bias led to the attack, and I love the last line: I will be sharing this.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 03:02 AM   #149
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,827
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Yes, but it's still a dangerous assumption that they're only disinhibited to say random offensive stuff for no purpose at all. I'm saying that a lot of them are disinhibited to say something they actually believe. Just because it happens to be horribly bigotted, doesn't mean someone doesn't believe it. And as I was saying, for some of them even something they think everyone else is thinking, they're just somehow too scared of the PC police to actually say it.

Or the shorter version: remember to apply Hanlon's razor. "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Oh there is definitely an aim with all this trolling. This is the beast that was awakened during Gamergate and never went back to bed. I, personally, don't think that the rise of this type of anti-feminism trolling and the rise of the Incel mass shooter are disconnected events. I think it is all linked. The kind of guy that would think shooting a yoga studio up is an alright reaction to not getting dates is also the type that would have railed against that Gillette advert that asked men to stop being stupidly toxic with their masculinity. For whatever reason they perceive themselves as under attack and identify feminism and the SJW movement in general as the source.


I mentioned it in the Box Office Truther thread but the subreddit r/MGTOW is one of the loci of this malicious mindset. Go there and read through their braindroppings and you will see that think if they don't bring women to heel again western civilization is doomed. There is some larger conspiracy theory they all sort of buy into that the SJW movement is pushing for female empowerment with the goal of reducing the birthrates of white people while importing non white outsiders that eventually "replace" the now dwindling white population.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 12:13 PM   #150
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,076
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Yes mate, but you need to say so, is all I'm saying. You guys have been using a GR definition on someone who self-admittedly doesn't know any GR. And telling him that something doesn't accelerate, when in fact by the only definition of acceleration he knows it does. That's the equivocation you're looking for.
This whole thing started when it was asked how photons could come under the influence of gravity when they don't have mass. Seems like that's pretty clearly a discussion of GR. Then the geometrical nature of GR was explained, again very clearly not a newtonian explanation.

I think WD Clinger's explanation was very good.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 12:44 PM   #151
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
This whole thing started when it was asked how photons could come under the influence of gravity when they don't have mass. Seems like that's pretty clearly a discussion of GR. Then the geometrical nature of GR was explained, again very clearly not a newtonian explanation.

I think WD Clinger's explanation was very good.
I have no clue what you guys are on about but I fail to see how my question had any significance in the discussion.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 01:18 PM   #152
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,076
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I have no clue what you guys are on about but I fail to see how my question had any significance in the discussion.
Do you feel like your question was answered?
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 02:57 PM   #153
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,047
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
This whole thing started when it was asked how photons could come under the influence of gravity when they don't have mass. Seems like that's pretty clearly a discussion of GR. Then the geometrical nature of GR was explained, again very clearly not a newtonian explanation.

I think WD Clinger's explanation was very good.
If that were the only question, sure, but the question right at the top of the page is more like "oh, maybe you can clarify the acceleration of gravity to me, then?", plus another question distinctly mentioning acceleration. And then they proceed to tell him that there's no acceleration, but it turns out, it's based on a whole different definition of acceleration than the rest of the world uses.

In fact, that apparently even a lot of physicists don't use that way until they know you're six foot deep in GR. I can link you Leonard Susskind lecture where he seems to use it, and the equivalence principle for that matter, the way I just did. And for that matter has no problem with calling an accelerating coordinate system a "reference frame".

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


I mean, he literally utters the words "accelerated reference frame" at the 12 minute mark in there.

So, yes, some cats are better at explaining things to normal people than others And while I respect W.D.Clinger for his knowledge, I find him to be the least good at explaining stuff to "normal" people on this board.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2019, 08:59 PM   #154
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Do you feel like your question was answered?
Absolutely.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.