LOL! Yes it does. Thanks, got a good laugh!RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 10:31 pmWhat Age means by, "truly open," is what is sometimes called an, "open mind."
An, "open mind," is like a open sewer into which just anything can be dumped and it has to accept it.
A, "closed mind," doesn't accept anything.
A, "descriminating mind," has a gate on it that does not allow anything in that cannot pass the test, "no contradictions allowed."
Age wants everyone to have an open mind into which he can dump all his contradictory crap.
Hope this helps.
Curiosity about E=mc squared
-
- Posts: 8117
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
Because of what 'you' are, and what 'you' are doing, 'you' are CLOSED, and thus NOT 'truly open'.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 6:06 pmWhat do you mean by me not being "truly open"?Age wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 3:53 pmThis is because 'you' are NOT Truly OPEN.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:09 am Thanks. Not that I really needed to know that in order to solve any equation I'm working on (as I'm not working on any) but the question did pop into my head when I was looking closely at the problem. I had an epiphany on the Theory of Relativity a few minutes ago that made some things more clear to me but then I hit some roadblocks on other aspects. My mind is touch and go these days. One minute it's thinking and the next minute I'm in "couch potato" mode.
By the way, there is NO "my mind".
By 'you' not being 'truly open' I mean that 'you' are NOT YET able to SEE the Truth of ALL 'things'.
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
Here is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of a human being making ASSUMPTIONS, which are OBVIOUSLY COMPLETELY and UTTERLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect, without even 'trying to' CLARIFY, FIRST.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:04 amLOL! Yes it does. Thanks, got a good laugh!RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 10:31 pmWhat Age means by, "truly open," is what is sometimes called an, "open mind."
An, "open mind," is like a open sewer into which just anything can be dumped and it has to accept it.
A, "closed mind," doesn't accept anything.
A, "descriminating mind," has a gate on it that does not allow anything in that cannot pass the test, "no contradictions allowed."
Age wants everyone to have an open mind into which he can dump all his contradictory crap.
Hope this helps.
Also, NOT one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction of mine" has EVER been expressed NOR shown here. And, ONLY until one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction" is SHARED, can "it' then be LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED.
Until then what is ACTUALLY happening here is "rcsaunders" is 'dumping' ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, while EXPECTING 'you', "others", to 'swallow it hook, line, and sinker', as some say, and accept it as the absolute truth.
By the way, what "rcsaunders" said here could not be FURTHER from thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things'. AND, ONLY those who are Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS enough will discover, learn, and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is here.
-
- Posts: 8117
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
How do you know your "Truth of things" also corresponds to my Truth of things? And if it doesn't, which one of us has it wrong?Age wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:01 pmHere is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of a human being making ASSUMPTIONS, which are OBVIOUSLY COMPLETELY and UTTERLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect, without even 'trying to' CLARIFY, FIRST.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:04 amLOL! Yes it does. Thanks, got a good laugh!RCSaunders wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 10:31 pm
What Age means by, "truly open," is what is sometimes called an, "open mind."
An, "open mind," is like a open sewer into which just anything can be dumped and it has to accept it.
A, "closed mind," doesn't accept anything.
A, "descriminating mind," has a gate on it that does not allow anything in that cannot pass the test, "no contradictions allowed."
Age wants everyone to have an open mind into which he can dump all his contradictory crap.
Hope this helps.
Also, NOT one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction of mine" has EVER been expressed NOR shown here. And, ONLY until one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction" is SHARED, can "it' then be LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED.
Until then what is ACTUALLY happening here is "rcsaunders" is 'dumping' ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, while EXPECTING 'you', "others", to 'swallow it hook, line, and sinker', as some say, and accept it as the absolute truth.
By the way, what "rcsaunders" said here could not be FURTHER from thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things'. AND, ONLY those who are Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS enough will discover, learn, and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is here.
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
BECAUSE of what Truth is, EXACTLY.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 4:08 amHow do you know your "Truth of things" also corresponds to my Truth of things?Age wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:01 pmHere is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of a human being making ASSUMPTIONS, which are OBVIOUSLY COMPLETELY and UTTERLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect, without even 'trying to' CLARIFY, FIRST.
Also, NOT one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction of mine" has EVER been expressed NOR shown here. And, ONLY until one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction" is SHARED, can "it' then be LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED.
Until then what is ACTUALLY happening here is "rcsaunders" is 'dumping' ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, while EXPECTING 'you', "others", to 'swallow it hook, line, and sinker', as some say, and accept it as the absolute truth.
By the way, what "rcsaunders" said here could not be FURTHER from thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things'. AND, ONLY those who are Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS enough will discover, learn, and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is here.
You, obviously, will have to provide examples for me to be able to tell you which one of us has it wrong.
Also, you appear to have completely forgotten what I mean, or refer to, as thee 'Truth of things'.
-
- Posts: 8117
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
What is this "truth"?Age wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:58 amBECAUSE of what Truth is, EXACTLY.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 4:08 amHow do you know your "Truth of things" also corresponds to my Truth of things?Age wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:01 pm
Here is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of a human being making ASSUMPTIONS, which are OBVIOUSLY COMPLETELY and UTTERLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect, without even 'trying to' CLARIFY, FIRST.
Also, NOT one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction of mine" has EVER been expressed NOR shown here. And, ONLY until one, supposed and alleged, "contradiction" is SHARED, can "it' then be LOOKED AT and DISCUSSED.
Until then what is ACTUALLY happening here is "rcsaunders" is 'dumping' ABSOLUTE RUBBISH, while EXPECTING 'you', "others", to 'swallow it hook, line, and sinker', as some say, and accept it as the absolute truth.
By the way, what "rcsaunders" said here could not be FURTHER from thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things'. AND, ONLY those who are Truly OPEN and Truly CURIOS enough will discover, learn, and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' is here.
What do you mean by "thee Truth of things." I don't remember you ever clarifying the concept. What is the truth of things?
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
What this One and ONLY Truth is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 7:14 amWhat is this "truth"?Age wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:58 amBECAUSE of what Truth is, EXACTLY.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 4:08 am
How do you know your "Truth of things" also corresponds to my Truth of things?
What I mean, and refer to, by the saying 'thee Truth of things' is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
And here is the very reason WHY 'you', human beings, take SO LONG to discover, find out and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of things IS.
Although I have been specifically advising to CLARIFY, BEFORE ASSUMING, for quite a while now, it is ONLY now that you have CLARIFIED.
By the way, I NEVER clarified the concept BECAUSE NO one asked me to. As I say I wait for those who are Truly CURIOS or Truly OPEN.
WOW, in just one post, three times you have asked me to CLARIFY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
To me, what is 'the truth of things' is very different from what 'the Truth of things' is.
Were you aware of this previously?
-
- Posts: 8117
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
You say, "thee Truth of things is that which everyone agrees with and accepts." Has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted something? (And if so, what was that which was/has been agreed on as being "thee Truth"? And secondly is it necessarily the case that whatever everyone agrees with and accepts is "thee Truth"? What if everyone is mistaken about something?Age wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 8:16 amWhat this One and ONLY Truth is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
What I mean, and refer to, by the saying 'thee Truth of things' is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
And here is the very reason WHY 'you', human beings, take SO LONG to discover, find out and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of things IS.
Although I have been specifically advising to CLARIFY, BEFORE ASSUMING, for quite a while now, it is ONLY now that you have CLARIFIED.
By the way, I NEVER clarified the concept BECAUSE NO one asked me to. As I say I wait for those who are Truly CURIOS or Truly OPEN.
WOW, in just one post, three times you have asked me to CLARIFY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
To me, what is 'the truth of things' is very different from what 'the Truth of things' is.
Were you aware of this previously?
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
YES.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pmYou say, "thee Truth of things is that which everyone agrees with and accepts."Age wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 8:16 amWhat this One and ONLY Truth is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
What I mean, and refer to, by the saying 'thee Truth of things' is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
And here is the very reason WHY 'you', human beings, take SO LONG to discover, find out and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of things IS.
Although I have been specifically advising to CLARIFY, BEFORE ASSUMING, for quite a while now, it is ONLY now that you have CLARIFIED.
By the way, I NEVER clarified the concept BECAUSE NO one asked me to. As I say I wait for those who are Truly CURIOS or Truly OPEN.
WOW, in just one post, three times you have asked me to CLARIFY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
To me, what is 'the truth of things' is very different from what 'the Truth of things' is.
Were you aware of this previously?
I do not know. This is because I have NOT asked EVERY human being.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm Has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted something?
And, if there has NEVER been any such event in human history, then EVERY one would agree with and accepts 'this', so then 'this' is 'thee Truth of things'.
BUT, if EVERY one was agreeing with and accepting 'this', then there is NOW such an event in human history where EVERY one did agree with each other and accepted some [this] thing. So, then the answer to your question here would NOW be, Yes.
So, does EVERY one agree and accept that up to when this question of "gary childress's" here was asked has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted some 'thing', like for example that there has NEVER been any such event, hitherto?
As I just said, I do not know, but could that the sun appeared in the sky be some thing that EVERY one could agree with each other and accepts?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm (And if so, what was that which was/has been agreed on as being "thee Truth"?
And, could there be other 'things' that EVERY one agrees with and accepts? Or, do you BELIEVE outright that there could NEVER be ANY thing that EVERY one agrees with and accepts?
Yes.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm And secondly is it necessarily the case that whatever everyone agrees with and accepts is "thee Truth"?
But not EVERY one would agree with some thing that could be mistaken.
-
- Posts: 8117
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
So if everyone agrees that everyone disagrees, then that counts as agreement--and therefore is equivalent to "thee Truth of things?"Age wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:54 amYES.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pmYou say, "thee Truth of things is that which everyone agrees with and accepts."Age wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 8:16 am
What this One and ONLY Truth is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
What I mean, and refer to, by the saying 'thee Truth of things' is 'that', which EVERY one agrees with and accepts.
And here is the very reason WHY 'you', human beings, take SO LONG to discover, find out and SEE what thee ACTUAL Truth of things IS.
Although I have been specifically advising to CLARIFY, BEFORE ASSUMING, for quite a while now, it is ONLY now that you have CLARIFIED.
By the way, I NEVER clarified the concept BECAUSE NO one asked me to. As I say I wait for those who are Truly CURIOS or Truly OPEN.
WOW, in just one post, three times you have asked me to CLARIFY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
To me, what is 'the truth of things' is very different from what 'the Truth of things' is.
Were you aware of this previously?
I do not know. This is because I have NOT asked EVERY human being.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm Has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted something?
And, if there has NEVER been any such event in human history, then EVERY one would agree with and accepts 'this', so then 'this' is 'thee Truth of things'.
BUT, if EVERY one was agreeing with and accepting 'this', then there is NOW such an event in human history where EVERY one did agree with each other and accepted some [this] thing. So, then the answer to your question here would NOW be, Yes.
So, does EVERY one agree and accept that up to when this question of "gary childress's" here was asked has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted some 'thing', like for example that there has NEVER been any such event, hitherto?
As I just said, I do not know, but could that the sun appeared in the sky be some thing that EVERY one could agree with each other and accepts?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm (And if so, what was that which was/has been agreed on as being "thee Truth"?
And, could there be other 'things' that EVERY one agrees with and accepts? Or, do you BELIEVE outright that there could NEVER be ANY thing that EVERY one agrees with and accepts?
Yes.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm And secondly is it necessarily the case that whatever everyone agrees with and accepts is "thee Truth"?
But not EVERY one would agree with some thing that could be mistaken.
As far as everyone being mistaken, suppose we all think we live in a world that has different characteristics, depending upon the beliefs of each different person, however, everyone is mistaken and none of the characteristics believed attributable to the world are true? For example, let's say the world consisted of Those who believe P is true, those who believe P is untrue, and agnostics and that that selection of categories exhausts the possible positions for everyone at a given time. So everyone is either a P believer, a P unbeliever or agnostic. Then years in the future we discover that there is a 4th possibility hitherto unthought of. Or perhaps we are incapable of discovering the true nature of things and we all think wrongly about the world in some fashion. Why not? Humanity has been ignorant about many things in the past. And quantum physics seems to be an ever-changing, ever-advancing field of knowledge.
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
If everyone agreeing on something does not count as 'agreement', then what does count as 'agreement'?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 amSo if everyone agrees that everyone disagrees, then that counts as agreementAge wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:54 amYES.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm
You say, "thee Truth of things is that which everyone agrees with and accepts."
I do not know. This is because I have NOT asked EVERY human being.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm Has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted something?
And, if there has NEVER been any such event in human history, then EVERY one would agree with and accepts 'this', so then 'this' is 'thee Truth of things'.
BUT, if EVERY one was agreeing with and accepting 'this', then there is NOW such an event in human history where EVERY one did agree with each other and accepted some [this] thing. So, then the answer to your question here would NOW be, Yes.
So, does EVERY one agree and accept that up to when this question of "gary childress's" here was asked has there been any such event in human history that everyone agreed with each other and accepted some 'thing', like for example that there has NEVER been any such event, hitherto?
As I just said, I do not know, but could that the sun appeared in the sky be some thing that EVERY one could agree with each other and accepts?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm (And if so, what was that which was/has been agreed on as being "thee Truth"?
And, could there be other 'things' that EVERY one agrees with and accepts? Or, do you BELIEVE outright that there could NEVER be ANY thing that EVERY one agrees with and accepts?
Yes.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:30 pm And secondly is it necessarily the case that whatever everyone agrees with and accepts is "thee Truth"?
But not EVERY one would agree with some thing that could be mistaken.
If you say so.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am -and therefore is equivalent to "thee Truth of things?"
I could 'suppose' this, but what for?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am As far as everyone being mistaken, suppose we all think we live in a world that has different characteristics, depending upon the beliefs of each different person, however, everyone is mistaken and none of the characteristics believed attributable to the world are true?
What you have written here has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I have said, and meant.
'We' could say this, but I prefer to NEVER say what is OBVIOUSLY NOT TRUE.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am For example, let's say the world consisted of Those who believe P is true, those who believe P is untrue, and agnostics and that that selection of categories exhausts the possible positions for everyone at a given time.
But, just because 'we' say some 'thing', this, by itself, does not necessarily make that 'thing' true, at all.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am So everyone is either a P believer, a P unbeliever or agnostic.
But 'we' are capable of discovering the true nature of things. In fact discovering the true nature of things is about one of the most simplest and most easiest things we can do.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am Then years in the future we discover that there is a 4th possibility hitherto unthought of. Or perhaps we are incapable of discovering the true nature of things and we all think wrongly about the world in some fashion.
But 'we' would NOT ALL think wrongly about the world in some fashion.
By your OWN "logic" and BELIEF 'we' ALL could NOT think this anyway, so that is 'why not'.
Could 'humanity' be ignorant about the things, which I have been saying and meaning here also?Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am Humanity has been ignorant about many things in the past.
Okay.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:18 am And quantum physics seems to be an ever-changing, ever-advancing field of knowledge.
Furthermore, IF 'you' just answered the clarifying questions I pose to 'you', Honestly, then could 'you' be or become less ignorant of what I have been saying and meaning here?
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
mc(squared, is the same as sayung M x C x C. It does not matter the order.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:42 pm It is said that E=mc with a little 2 just above the "c" indicating that something is squared. My question is, what is squared? Is the result of the multiplication of "m" and "c" squared or is the c squared first and then multiplied by m?
or mass times 448,900,000,000,000,000 mph
SO lots of energy for a very small mass.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
What would the units of energy measure be using the basic E=mc^2, Would it be ergs. BTUs, watts, joules, or what. For example what would the unit of measure be for the energy for a gram of mass. (I know any of the units can be converted into any of the others, so I'm just asking how it's usually specified. I'm really curious, because I've forgotten and it annoys me.)Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 2:29 pmmc(squared, is the same as sayung M x C x C. It does not matter the order.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:42 pm It is said that E=mc with a little 2 just above the "c" indicating that something is squared. My question is, what is squared? Is the result of the multiplication of "m" and "c" squared or is the c squared first and then multiplied by m?
or mass times 448,900,000,000,000,000 mph
SO lots of energy for a very small mass.
Never mind, I just found it. It's 8.9876 X 10^16 Joules for one kilogram of mass, if your interested.
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
Thats 21271510516252.390625 calories, or enough energy to feed 10 billion people for a dayRCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:23 amWhat would the units of energy measure be using the basic E=mc^2, Would it be ergs. BTUs, watts, joules, or what. For example what would the unit of measure be for the energy for a gram of mass. (I know any of the units can be converted into any of the others, so I'm just asking how it's usually specified. I'm really curious, because I've forgotten and it annoys me.)Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 2:29 pmmc(squared, is the same as sayung M x C x C. It does not matter the order.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:42 pm It is said that E=mc with a little 2 just above the "c" indicating that something is squared. My question is, what is squared? Is the result of the multiplication of "m" and "c" squared or is the c squared first and then multiplied by m?
or mass times 448,900,000,000,000,000 mph
SO lots of energy for a very small mass.
Never mind, I just found it. It's 8.9876 X 10^16 Joules for one kilogram of mass, if your interested.
Or equivalent to 24965555556 Kwh. Probably the energy requirements for quater of a million homes in a cold climate for a year.
Harnessing it is another matter.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Curiosity about E=mc squared
Hot stuff, Sculptor, and interesting too. Thanks!Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 10:38 amThats 21271510516252.390625 calories, or enough energy to feed 10 billion people for a dayRCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:23 amWhat would the units of energy measure be using the basic E=mc^2, Would it be ergs. BTUs, watts, joules, or what. For example what would the unit of measure be for the energy for a gram of mass. (I know any of the units can be converted into any of the others, so I'm just asking how it's usually specified. I'm really curious, because I've forgotten and it annoys me.)
Never mind, I just found it. It's 8.9876 X 10^16 Joules for one kilogram of mass, if your interested.
Or equivalent to 24965555556 Kwh. Probably the energy requirements for quater of a million homes in a cold climate for a year.
Harnessing it is another matter.