Posted: Nov 06, 2016 2:47 pm
by electricgravity1
Thomas Eshuis wrote:Please do take care to use the quote tags properly so it doesn't mess up who said what.

I'll take as much care of my forum punctuation as you do of your science, that's fair.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
electricgravity1 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:If you knew how both science and rational skepticism work, you'd know you've first have to evidence your assertions. They don't get the status of fait accompli just because you asserted them.


If ever you do a highschool level course on science, they will try to teach you about the scientific method

I'll ask you this once not attack me personally, especially not by making fantastical accusations about my lack of education.


I'll tell you once I'll treat you as you treat me
"If you knew how both science and rational skepticism work, you'd know you've first have to evidence your assertions." - TE
was met equally by...
"If ever you do a highschool level course on science, they will try to teach you about the scientific method " - EG1

That you don't seem aware that I was responding in equal tone to your 1st personal attack on me, instead of paying interest to my argument, is typical of RS members. I'm neither surprised nor offended.

So now you do what every generic RS member loves doing, avoiding the subject and instead trying to nitpick, often failing. Yawn.

In science a hypothesis is not the same as a theory. A theory is an explanation of observed facts that has passed peer-review.


Wrong. Hypotheses are untested valid theories, that you failed to point this out in your 'explanation' just suggests you are trying to avoid the truth. Theories don't have to pass peer review. Many scientific groups go from hypothesis to testing to conlcusion without submitting their work to peer review.


TE wrote:
electricgravity1 wrote:Hypotheses are an integral part of science. The electric gravity theory is a hypothesis.

You can just mix colloqial and rigourous terms.
In science it's either/or. Once something becomes a theory, it's no longer a hypothesis.


Not to me. A Hypothesis is theory, an untested theory, that's the way it is for me, and many other scientists.

TE wrote:
electricgravity1 wrote:
It suggests that since electric charge is variable, and that gravity is electrostatic, then gravity of a set mass ( e.g. planet , moon, asteroid ) is variable over time. Hence it is likely that other worlds have different values of big G. Hence a Cavendish experiment on another world would be a good test of the electric gravity theory. Further a Cavendish would be an especially strong test because it would also falsify conventional gravity theory - this makes it a discerning \ distinguishing test, which is the best sort of test, although this is rarely taught in academia any more.
I wonder why conventional scientists aren't in a rush to do a Cavendish experiment on another world?... hmm

As I pointed out before, it doesn't matter what you suggest, think or can conceive of, it matters what you can demonstrate.
Hypotheses don't become theories the instant they're falsifiable. They have to be supported by actual evidence and demonstration.


According to you all of Einstein's work amounted to nothing. He never did any demonstrative \ practical work, only theory. This goes for thousands of scientists across all fields. What strikes the most is how perfectly convinced you come across in your writing.
If you do a high school science course they will try to teach you something like " science walks on 2 feet, theory and experiment ". If this sounds a difficult concept then take comfort in this : you already understand half of it : science requires experiment. So well done so far. Now you just need to gain an understanding that there is another component to the scientific method that only requires " suggestion, thought and conception " - its called theoretical physics.

Now, if you are capable of being realistic instead of spinning in your own fairyland, you might actually see there's a reason why I'm only doing theoretical physics atm and not doing a Cavendish experiment on another world. I won't condescend to telling you what that reason is, I'll let you show me and everyone here that you can work it out yourself.

TE wrote:
electricgravity1 wrote:
if you go to school, good luck on your science high school science exam, and try to remember my advice.

Stuff your condscending bullshit.


I'm only reciprocating your condescending BS. Try for once to break your lifetime habits - consider critiquing the electric gravity theory, instead of telling an oldman scientist he doesn't know science. Then maybe you'll stop receiving condescending BS.