Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Pete Svarrior

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 254  Next >
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 05, 2019, 11:20:25 PM »
My source is thermodynamics.
I'm afraid that's not how citations work.

It is not something I made up.
Unfortunately, I already demonstrated that you're in disagreement with the mainstream on that one. An explanation was given to you. If you have an objection, you need to articulate an argument. If you cannot put together a rebuttal, that's fine, it happens a lot around here. But you won't be allowed to continuously waste people's time by just declaring yourself the victor while contributing nothing of value.

b) The universe, by definition is that which contains everything.  The universe cannot receive energy or matter from outside it, and cannot send energy or matter outside it.
b) is not a logical conclusion, since the "outside of the Universe", something external to the set of everything, is undefined and therefore meaningless. The problem, as always, is that you assert yourself to be correct, and when asked to provide citations, you just assert yourself to be correct some more.

This is not a good look.

And, yeas, in science definitions are critically important.
Indeed. You'd do well to stop botching them. Again, the question here isn't even whether you're right or wrong. It's whether you will eventually put together a coherent sentence.

Score: FE - fail.
It is in particularly poor form to make declarations like these. Trust me, it won't convince the unconvinced, and those who already agree with you will just think you're weakening your argument by acting like a child. I appreciate your effort to join the upper fora, and I'm happy to help you ease into posting here, but you can do so much better than that.

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: December 05, 2019, 01:25:27 PM »
What better time to gift your nephew a cat?
No! Not even as a joke. So many pets get gifted to/by people who do not understand the level of commitment involved. Animals are friends, not things :(

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: December 05, 2019, 01:07:45 PM »
You should still gift the cat food to your nephew.

Good luck with the replacement.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 05, 2019, 01:02:19 PM »
Pete, let me apologize.
You do not need to apologise - merely contribute (if you're posting in the upper).

The reason I'm not declaring whether or not the FE universe is isolated is because it is not fully pertinent top the question.
I already explained to you why it is. I guess I'll have to do so again.

However, I did not invent the FE UA system.  I assume you guy's did, so the definitions are up to you.
The Universe is fairly well-defined, independently of FE vs RE.

You can approach the problem either way.  If the description of FE UA in the wiki does encompass an isolated system, then you just show how energy is conserved within that system.  If it does not encompass an isolated system, then just show where the energy is coming from so that an isolated system can be defined (the FE UA system + the Energy system) wherein the energy is conserved.
I don't need to do either of these things, for a plethora of reasons. The fact that calling the Universe an isolated system is meaningless is crucial here. Your objection has no defined meaning, and cannot be answered until you've fixed it. If you truly believe that meaningless statements require answers, or are in any way significant, then let me ask you this: If the Earth is round, then why zibbidy snorty floorp, de rooba shnort?

As to whether or not the universe most RE folk adhere to is and isolated system,  in thermodynamics and isolated system is a system which does not or can not exchange either energy or matter with its surroundings.   By definition, the universe is self contained and therefore cannot exchange energy or matter.
I'm afraid you restating your position doesn't make it any more mainstream or correct. This is why I asked you for a source.

Or you can read this excerpt from Quora:
If Quora, of all places, is good enough for you, then hopefully you'll be generous enough to accept Wikipedia as a counter-example:

Sometimes people speculate about "isolation" for the universe as a whole, but the meaning of such speculation is doubtful.

See, the issue here is that you propose something that makes no sense (the Universe is isolated? From what?), assert that it is the case "by definition", and demand that we address your mess. It's not gonna happen, you're going to have to fix your claims. I'm not even asking that you make sure you're correct, merely that you make sure your statements have a discernible meaning.

Pete, if you don't understand thermodynamics, then why did you involve yourself in this?
This is your final friendly reminder that you are currently not in AR/CN. You can discuss just how stupid, uneducated, and smelly I am in the appropriate boards.

You should probably search around the forum and wiki. Both of your questions have been asked and answered before, and duplicate threads don't really help matters.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 04, 2019, 06:11:01 PM »
A second friendly reminder that you're not currently in AR for a change. If you do not want to contribute to the discussion, there's no obligation for you to post.

what I want
That's great, but if you're not willing to defend your claims, you probably shouldn't be making them in the first place. You're welcome to retract them.

One of the "flaws" you're claiming relies on assumptions that you're refusing to justify. Naturally, one has to assume that you have a reason to refuse that.

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: December 04, 2019, 10:50:55 AM »
My brother, 'Uncle Bad Touch', is far more frightening.
At last, a glimpse into Big Mike's origin story!

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 04, 2019, 10:43:24 AM »
Pete, by definition a universe is an isolated system.   Yeah, I'm in agreement with the definition.
I cannot find a source that agrees with you. Perhaps you'd like to provide one instead of just saying you're right repeatedly?

The consensus appears to be that it would be entirely meaningless to call the Universe an isolated system (since anything external to the Universe is undefined), but I'm happy for you to defend your case. Just, you know, actually say something more useful than "I am correct.       Yeah, I am very right, yes."

Now, the only thing we need to decide on it whether or not all the stuff subject to FE UA constitutes an isolated system, or are there things in the FE universe WRT which the earth and all celestial bodies are accelerating at 9.8 m/(s^2).
Right, you're going to have to make up your mind on this one. First you said that you don't know what the system is. When I asked you to clarify, you accused me of strawmanning you and declared that you obviously do know what it is. Now you're back to saying you don't know.

Please pick a line of argumentation and stick with it. It's extremely difficult to have a meaningful conversation when you keep arguing with yourself.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 03, 2019, 04:53:07 PM »
A "straw man"? Asking you to clarify your position while expressly avoiding assumptions is the very opposite of straw manning someone. It's a shame that you'd respond to basic scrutiny with immediate accusations, but let's try to carry on.

So, you wanted to talk about planets, but also made "an allusion" to a different discussion that could be had about the Universe. Excellent, we can work with that. While the former is pretty clear, I'm very interested as to whether you think the Universe is an isolated system. Your claims about UAT seem to rely on that assumption (feel free to elaborate if this is not the case), but it's a rather novel assumption without much mainstream support.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 03, 2019, 04:34:37 PM »
Where did I state that I didn't know what system I'm making claims about?
I already provided you with the relevant quote: A planet (whole universe?)

If you do know which one it is, simply state it. The way you left it suggests you can't quite narrow it down. This is why I'm asking you to make yourself clear.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 03, 2019, 04:14:29 PM »
Are you talking [...]
If you are talking about FE UA [...]
Or are you saying [...]
I'm not saying anything. You are. You pointed out that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant while simultaneously stating that you don't know what system you're making claims about (A planet (whole universe?)).

I'm asking you to tidy up your claims, because I'd rather rely on you making yourself clear than risk putting words in your mouth.

Wasn't it your chief editor of the wiki (AKA Tom)
I don't see how inventing titles for Tom would absolve you of having to main internally consistent claims, nor do I see how Tom's position has any bearing on yours.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Gravity
« on: December 03, 2019, 03:01:31 PM »
How have you determined that the system you're considering is isolated if you don't even know what the system is?

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: December 02, 2019, 11:30:47 AM »
Theoretically, sure. My direct experience is that this rarely matters for reliability.

It can add latency, which is a valid reason to prefer a wired network, but I've almost never had problems with Wi-Fi reliability in the past couple of years that weren't caused by bugs in my Wi-Fi driver. I've more often had my uplink be unreliable than my Wi-Fi connection.
Reliability is a difficult thing to define. Sure, a Wi-Fi connection that's been established will probably not sporadically drop, and your mileage will probably be fairly consistent. But the moment you enter the realm of video games (which often transmit large bursts of data, requiring both good throughput and latency), or high-resolution video streaming, you're starting to push the boundaries of what Wi-Fi can do in a residential setting.

in which case running cables inside the walls is likely a non-starter
I agree that running cables inside the wall would be ideal, and that it's a massive hassle, especially in rented accommodation. However, as a routine tenancy agreement violator, I can say with some confidence that landlords don't have the time to argue with you over a little bit of adhesive trunking attached to the walls, so long as you don't make it look like utter arse.

In an ideal world, every house would have an RJ45 port or two wired up with every electrical socket. In reality, a Wi-Fi repeater is often just as reliable as a wired connection (or at the very least, more reliable than the ISP it connects you to) and far simpler and more flexible to set up and maintain.
I've never found a Wi-Fi repeater that didn't suck, but I gave up on them early on. Or perhaps I was luckier with ISPs than you were. Wi-Fi repeaters don't make sense to me from a physics standpoint - you add congestion to an already noisy frequency, and now your device has to rely on *two* shitty radio connections. You've made the two biggest problems of Wi-Fi worse. I'd much rather go with powerline networking. It offers you a chance of not ruining your bandwidth, generally provides good latency, and if mobility is a factor you can use them as a basis of a Wi-Fi access point.

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: December 02, 2019, 11:05:44 AM »
Did you last use Wi-Fi in 2006?
His comment still holds. In fact, it holds today more so than it did in 2006. Your options are 2.4GHz bands, which are almost universally congested; and 5GHz which hates walls and doors - those things that houses have. I'm using Wi-Fi as a temporary solution for my new place - it's fantastic at reducing my 1Gbps link to a much tastier 66Mbps at the far end of the house. And my case is relatively good compared to people whose networks I was asked to "fix" in the past.

A good CAT5e/CAT6 run trumps all. Your edgy tech takes are shite.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Session problems on the Wiki
« on: November 30, 2019, 11:29:32 PM »
The only instance in which I can see myself getting logged out frequently is if I choose not to select the "keep me logged in" checkbox. Is this what you're experiencing?

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: November 30, 2019, 09:29:34 AM »
Adding [b] doesn't make you any more correct.
I will assume that you know what emphasis is, and that you're just trying to waste my time in the absence of arguments that aren't dumb. You'd think the big brain computer boy could either argue on merit or accept that he simply forgot to look shit up in advance of starting an argument, without having to resort to distractions.

You're correct in that if you choose your hardware carefully with Windows, you get the behaviour you want. That is also my point.
And I'm explaining to you, repeatedly, that your point does not apply to reality. You will not find modern hardware that can run Windows, meets the requirements for SSD caching in general (inb4 wHaT iF yOu dOn'T hAvE aN sSd!!!), and which won't support SSD caching in Windows out of the box.

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: November 30, 2019, 12:47:15 AM »
There is a very clear functional difference, and that is whether the implementation works with all supported hardware or a subset of it. AMD's implementation of this requires that you use AMD hardware. Linux's implementation works on any hardware, even non-x86.
The software that automatically installs with Windows, and which comes pre-installed at OEM stage works with your machine. If you choose to do something else, you do so at your own behest, and it is assumed that you know what you're doing. There is no functional difference.

Technology & Information / Re: Nephew's Computer
« on: November 29, 2019, 12:58:44 PM »
I admit I didn't know about this. Good to see AMD doing Microsoft's job of developing basic OS functionality for them.
Plenty of third parties have solutions for this. Your preference for the "OS vendor" (oftentimes a loosely organised group of enthusiasts) being responsible for all the things is just that - a preference with no functional difference. A loosely organised collective of megacorps is doing the exact same thing, except they don't slap a singular badge on it.

My point is that when using this amount of data, an extra 500 GB SSD is unlikely to make much difference long-term because you likely also have high growth. In other words, you need a bigger HDD anyway.
This is debatable. My experience with home users is that they're dealing with a slow creep of data. It can be easily reduced, but it's a faff. Delaying the inevitable purge is beneficial.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Session problems on the Wiki
« on: November 29, 2019, 12:13:28 PM »
Yeah, something seems to be going horribly wrong with the session caching, though I'm not yet sure what. I don't think we've ever had a MediaWiki upgrade that hasn't gone awry, perhaps we should consider switching to another CMS.

I've just tried fiddling with the caching options, and the error hasn't reoccurred over 10 minutes of testing, though that proves nothing since the issue was intermittent beforehand. If it's still happening, please let me know.

We'll keep investigating and looking for a proper fix.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 254  Next >