My Infalliable Belief system

Dywyddyr said:
Which was what I said at the very start... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
for your edification, this is what you said at the start ....

In zero g "up" and "down" are purely arbitrary conventions. "Down" is the direction in gravity pulls. No gravity = no down.

IOW far from designating gravity as but one of several ways to allocate the direction up or down, you were saying it was the only way.


Hence my repetition of "Ask SciWiter what he meant".
Click to expand...
he was talking about pyramids purely as a design/architectural problem


If you paid for a trip "to see the pyramids" what would your expectations be? Would you be satisfied with a bus journey of five minutes to look at plastic-straw constructed miniatures?
Click to expand...
If someone posted this .....

Yes, unlike, for not only has science contributed to just about every aspect of our lives, but it has erased all the footholds formerly attributed to 'God', causing that notion to shrink away to nothing and then vanish altogether, but for those with thinking problems and/or greed, for belief has no assistant or fact at all, as does atheism have science for its grounding.

Can't build a pyramid upside down, starting at the top in thin air and then trying to add layers and layers of fabricated structure in an attempt to shore it up.


.... you think they are talking about a trip to Egypt or something?
:eek:

btw, still waiting for you to tell me what essential building materials a cube requires in order to distinguish itself from a cuboid shape ... although I am tending to think we have just covered another ineffable and inexplicable component of your infallible belief system ... namely an inability to entertain holistic categories (when it suits your purposes of course)
 
lightgigantic said:
for your edification, this is what you said at the start ....
Click to expand...
If only you'd looked two posts above:
In zero g there is no "up or "down" therefore the question becomes moot.
Click to expand...
Or maybe even read my sentence that you have just quoted:
In zero g "up" and "down" are purely arbitrary conventions.
Click to expand...

IOW far from designating gravity as but one of several ways to allocate the direction up or down, you were saying it was the only way.
Click to expand...
Not at all. Where did I say it was the only way?

he was talking about pyramids purely as a design/architectural problem
Click to expand...
Okay. According to you at least.

To me me when someone says "pyramid" I assume (until they indicate otherwise) that they mean a pyramid.

Plus, of course, his subsequent line "and then trying to add layers and layers of fabricated structure in an attempt to shore it up" does rather indicate that making it out of straws and then filling it up is not what was intended.

btw, still waiting for you to tell me what essential building materials a cube requires in order to distinguish itself from a cuboid shape ... although I am tending to think we have just covered another ineffable and inexplicable component of your infallible belief system ... namely an inability to entertain holistic categories (when it suits your purposes of course)
Click to expand...
Ah, diversion attempts. What fun.
 
Dywyddyr said:
If only you'd looked two posts above:

Or maybe even read my sentence that you have just quoted:



Not at all. Where did I say it was the only way?
Click to expand...
nowhere did you say that applying direction in terms of gravity is an arbitrary consideration.

IOW what you are failing to entertain is that there are ways to apply directions even in zero g


Okay. According to you at least.

To me me when someone says "pyramid" I assume (until they indicate otherwise) that they mean a pyramid.
Click to expand...
so do I.
I mean if someone starts talking about cubes in terms of their construction, I don't think about ice cubes or rubiks cubes or whatever

Plus, of course, his subsequent line "and then trying to add layers and layers of fabricated structure in an attempt to shore it up" does rather indicate that making it out of straws and then filling it up is not what was intended.
Click to expand...
Why would making subsequent layers of fabricated structure out of filled up frameworks defy the design brief?


Ah, diversion attempts. What fun.
Click to expand...
I just thought that since you having such a ball with playing off pyramids as the Egyptian variety (and not even the Mesopotamian variety) you could also pull the party trick with other 3D shapes.

So tell me, what building materials\design brief does a cube require in order to distinguish itself from a cuboid structure, since you have similarly clear ideas about how a pyramid distinguishes itself from a pyramidal structure.

/grabs popcorn
 
Yes, good fun, but I'm not telling, for I already told how an idea pyramid must have support for its form and its top, especially if some all-seeing-eye of 'God' is placed there.

I saw the Sphinx, too. Its glance was fixed on something else. It was the glance of a being who thinks in centuries and millenniums. I did not exist and could not exist for it, for it was the face of eternity.

And yet…

Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock’d them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:

“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”

Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

— Percy Shelley
 
SciWriter said:
Yes, good fun, but I'm not telling, for I already told how an idea pyramid must have support for its form and its top, especially if some all-seeing-eye of 'God' is placed there.
Click to expand...
and I already explained how a high school science class can do it without too much sweat
;)
 
lightgigantic said:
nowhere did you say that applying direction in terms of gravity is an arbitrary consideration.
Click to expand...
Ah, so because I didn't say it directly (despite having previously stated that up and down are arbitrary), I must have meant the opposite.
Regardless: how, by convention, practice and whatever else is "up" differentiated from "down"?

IOW what you are failing to entertain is that there are ways to apply directions even in zero g
Click to expand...
Other than arbitrarily?

So tell me, what building materials\design brief does a cube require in order to distinguish itself from a cuboid structure, since you have similarly clear ideas about how a pyramid distinguishes itself from a pyramidal structure.
Click to expand...
Again a diversion.
Cube doesn't have a general meaning separate from its geometrical one. Pyramid, on the other hand...
 
lightgigantic said:
and I already explained how a high school science class can do it without too much sweat
;)
Click to expand...

It didn't lead to 'God' on top.


In the Egyptian pyramid there were 4000 year-old iron weapons that did not rust, looking as new as the day they were forged. I held glass that bent without breaking. I drank from a vase that poured water without end. I filled an entire tub from it and bathed away all my dirt and dust. A compass needle went around and never stopped. I ate a cake but I still had it. I saw the starry skies through solid rock walls. I entered a room that had no door. There was light within the room but no flame or openings. I looked into a grain of sand and saw eternity.
 
Dywyddyr said:
IOW what you are failing to entertain is that there are ways to apply directions even in zero g
Click to expand...

Other than arbitrarily?
Click to expand...

When a cosmonaut goes out for a space walk, this is in zero g, but it's kind of important where up, down, left, right and such is ... if he wants to get back to his mother ship that is ...

Call it arbitrary, but it is kind of important ...


Cube doesn't have a general meaning separate from its geometrical one. Pyramid, on the other hand...
Click to expand...

the-kaba-02-500.jpg


The Kaaba (Arabic: الكعبة‎ al-Kaʿbah IPA: [ʔælˈkæʕbɐ], English: The Cube)
 
Signal said:
When a cosmonaut goes out for a space walk, this is in zero g, but it's kind of important where up, down, left, right and such is ... if he wants to get back to his mother ship that is ...

Call it arbitrary, but it is kind of important ...
Click to expand...
Yes, But his definitions of left etc depend on what he decides they are. Probably oriented around his own body.

The Kaaba (Arabic: الكعبة‎ al-Kaʿbah IPA: [ʔælˈkæʕbɐ], English: The Cube)
Click to expand...
And that would spring to mind if some one said "cube" to you?
 
Signal said:
What point would you like to make by calling it "arbitrary"?
Click to expand...
I think we're going round in circles here. :p
The point was: in zero g how do you define something as being "upside down"?
Only by applying an arbitrary system...
 
Signal said:
And this is relevant for the OP "infallible belief system" how?
Click to expand...
It's a side track* - brought up by SCiWriter and hammered at by LightGigantic.

* A side track that probably covers more posts than the actual subject of the thread. But, meh, that's Sci. :D
 
ULTRA said:
In my belief system, all facts are factual, and thats a fact. I arrive at these facts, and because facts are always true, my belief system is always the truth. Unproven facts that I believe are still facts because I believe them with my infalliable belief system, and that proves them.

Today's fact: Hotter wetter water is better water than cooler harder water for making tea. See, it's true...
Click to expand...

Apparently your spelling isn't infall(i)able lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top