It was apparently first printed in 1976 according to this page I found discussing it.
Comment on US education
TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
When was this written? Also, it’s not entirely untrue to say that we know what electromagnetic force does, but not what causes it. They say it’s a ‘fundamental force’, which is basically way of saying we can’t further reduce it to explain in terms of other stuff. We don’t know what any of the fundamental forces (electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and weak nuclear forces) really are - we can only describe their effects on the world with maths (‘what they do’)
EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
Zerush@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
Good find , from the same book, respect Astronomy, explained with the Bible (in a science Book)
obinice@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
That quote from the bible sounds a lot like they were saying “the things you see are made of things you can’t see”.
Which is totally accurate, atoms baby!
i_dont_want_to@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
The whole time I was reading that, I was thinking “man, I miss the old Cracked. This is gold.”
Then, I saw the author was Seanbaby! I think I know what site I will be wasting time on next.
f314@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I love how the book says that no one has observed electricity, yet it has a picture of a lightning bolt on the cover 🤦
EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
“That’s not you observing electricity, that’s just seeing something electricity does heathen.”
Those guys probably.
Their argument seems to be that since you can’t actually see it, as in you can’t pump electricity into a clear pipe and see flowing through the pipe like water. That “science” must just be lying to you.
jaybone@lemmy.zip 4 weeks ago
But you can see it though. You can see it arc right?
zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
You can’t see water either, only its effects on light that goes to your eyes
protist@mander.xyz 4 weeks ago
Oh my…that page is amazing
jaybone@lemmy.zip 4 weeks ago
Holy shit, I thought this had to be fake. :(
Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I think you’re on the right track. It’s like they heard “you can’t hold and observe an electron” and just really ran with that but missed all the actual nuance behind it. Still baffling why they would print this, seeming to point to on something like only god knows how electricity works while there’s a person using a very clearly engineered device and electric socket.
baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
This is the basis for their entire “understanding” of the world. It’s how they thank god when a doctor heals them. It’s how they can say that something produced by the scientific process (vaccines) are bad, but then enjoy so many of the benefits of the exact same process (pain meds). “God did it” is the ultimate willful ignorance.
balsoft@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
Given it has a color photo attached to it, it was definitely published when we already understood the theory of electricity really well, so it doesn’t get a pass.
I’d argue that for fundamental forces, “what they are” and “what they do” is the same, by definition.
And in any case, mains supply in your home is not just electromagnetic waves vibing around, it’s electrons engineered to move through wires in very specific ways, transferring power from a moving magnet or (increasingly) a photon falling on a semiconductor junction, to move another magnet, heat up some metal, or (increasingly) bounce around some electrons between some semiconductor junctions and then emit photons from other semiconductors junctions.
Finally, most of the text is bullshit even if you don’t think we know what fundamental forces “are”:
You can easily feel electric discharge. Just rub your hair on some wool.
Just be around a thunderstorm. Thunder is the sound of an electric discharge.
You can see where the energy that moved the electrons in your wires came from: app.electricitymaps.com
It was written by a complete and utter buffoon, and it can’t be redeemed with any amount of handwaving or philosophizing over what it means to “know” or what things “are”.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
It’s even worse than that. Electric lighting predates the photo camera by several decades
bigfondue@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Faraday’s law and Lenz law were discovered in the 1830s
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
The first arclamp is from the 1800-1810s. They weren’t exactly selling them in stores by then, but they had been invented.
balsoft@lemmy.ml 4 weeks ago
I’d argue we didn’t fully understand the theory of electricity until we understood the atomic structures of metals and semiconductors, and that was properly developed in the early 20th century.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
You could place “understanding” at many points in history, and several in the future:
Building an arclamp powered by a portable generator is damned impressive.
Sending a message via electromagnetic waves shows very impressive understanding of electricity too.
Having a small electromagnetic particle accelerator in your house to show moving pictures is pretty damned amazing.
Using electricity and basically sand to do maths is insanely impressive.
On the other hand, you might argue we don’t understand electricity because we don’t have a unified field theory.
Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I think it might be real:
TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
I totally agree that the rest of it is nonsense, I was just commenting on the what it is/what it does bit