reliv3

@reliv3@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨your mom falls significantly faster than g⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Even if you imagine doing them separately, the acceleration of the Earth cannot be calculated based on just a singular force unless you assume nothing else is exerting a force on the Earth during the process of the fall. For a realistic model, this is a bad assumption. The Earth is a massive system which interacts with a lot of different systems. The one tiny force exerted on it by either the feather or bowling ball has no measurable affect on the motion of Earth. This is not just a mass issue, it’s the fact that Earth’s free body diagram would be full of Force Vectors and only one of them would either be the feather or bowling ball as they fall.

  As for my second point, I understand your model and I am defining these references frames by talking about where an observer is located. An observer standing still on Earth would measure the acceleration of the feather or bowling ball to be 9.81 m/s/s. If we placed a camera on the feather or bowling ball during the fall, then they would measure the acceleration of the Earth to also be 9.81 m/s/s. There is no classical way that these two observers would disagree with each other in the magnitudes of the acceleration.

  Think of a simpler example. A person driving a car towards someone standing at a stop sign. If the car is moving 20 mph towards the pedestrian, then in the perspective of the car’s driver, the pedestrian is moving 20 mph towards them. There is no classical way that these two speeds will be different…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨your mom falls significantly faster than g⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  This argument is deeply flawed when applying classical Newtonian physics. You have two issues:

  1. Acceleration of a system is caused by a sum of forces or a net force, not individual forces. To claim that the Earth accelerates differently due to two different forces is an incorrect application of Newton’s second law. If you drop a bowling and feather in a vacuum, then both the feather and the bowling ball will be pulling on the Earth simultaneously. The Earth’s acceleration be the same towards both the bowling ball and the feather, because we would consider both the force of the feather on the Earth and the force of the bowling ball on the Earth when calculating the acceleration of the Earth.
  2. You present this notion that two different systems can accelerate at 9.81 m/s/s towards Earth according to an observer standing on the surface of Earth; but when you place an observer on either surface of the two systems, Earth is accelerating at a different rate. This is classically impossible. If two systems are accelerating at 9.81 m/s/s towards Earth, then Earth must be accelerating 9.81 m/s/s towards both systems too.
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  From your description, it sounds like you are an Agnostic Atheist. It takes some faith to be an Atheist. Personally, I agree with your points, so I’d be more of an Agnostic Atheist too; but I am somewhat convinced that science has decent evidence which disproves the old and new testament god. I believe our scientific understanding of our universe suggests god would not give a shit whether it was worshipped and it would not be some moral judge. It’s consciousness (if we can even call it that) would be so far beyond what humans could comprehend that our puny human morales and ethical dilemmas would be irrelevant to it. Nevertheless, I still think human morales and ethics are important, because us Agnostic Atheists don’t need the fear of divine retribution to do the right thing.

  Thank you for sharing your beliefs in such detail. I appreciate it. Sorry to hear about your experience with those forcing their religion on you due to being transgendered. I am cisgendered, but I like to consider myself an ally. I have a lgbtq+ flag flying in my classroom (I’m a teacher) and I already had to give a student a stern talk for telling me that “god loves you” after looking at my flag

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I agree with this sentiment, but Christianity is partly defined by “spreading the word of god”. So “telling people what to believe” is par for the course (think missionaries).

  Curious though, why do you not refer to yourself as atheist? Non-religious is actually not very specific. Non-religious can mean Agnostic Theist, Agnostic Atheist, or Atheist.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If Bethesda released Skyrim today, they would have made it woke⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  The reality is: if you don’t understand why providing “white” scholarships is very different from providing “people of color” scholarships, then you don’t have a full understanding of how Racism manifests in America. This is a fundamental thing you will need to work to better understand before a discussion of this topic can be useful.

  Nevertheless, you are correct that not every white person in America take advantage of generational wealth, but this is besides the point. The fact is Black Americans have been in this country for 400 years and the community is still disproportionately impoverished, whereas there are a lot of European/Asian immigrants who have been here for much less time and they are much better off. You kind of make this observation in your response, but missed the implications it has on how Racism rewards certain demographics.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Can anyone suggest some good co-op games for two people?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Project Zomboid. Feels like a Sims game with zombie and great survival elements. Arguably, the best zombie survival game to hit the market. Supports split screen couch co-op.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Wow, this is so much faster⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s pretty cool that you did archery at a national level.

  Respectfully, I still think that I am correctly interpretting the information on the Wikipedia links sourced above. I’m basing my conclusion off two pieces of evidence. The longbow wiki page linked above mentions that longbows existed in “many cultures”, and there is a separate Wikipedia page for the English Longbow. This pushes me to conclude that there is a symantical difference between the two terms, “longbow” and “English Longbow” though many people assume the latter when the former is mentioned.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Wow, this is so much faster⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Very interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing. I’m just pointing out that people are assuming “English Longbow” when saying “longbow”. Which, to be fair to these folks, the English Longbow is likely the most famous longbow in history. Nevertheless, even the Wikipedia page sourced above mentions that longbows existed in “many cultures” and there is a separate Wikipedia page for the English Longbow. This pushes me to conclude that there is a symantical difference between the two terms, “longbow” and “English Longbow” though many people assume the latter when the former is mentioned.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Wow, this is so much faster⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Reading your links, the correction you made seems semantically insignificant. Yumi is the word for “bow” in Japanese and longbows describe a bow that are long. Longbows are not unique to the English, and there are a lot of bows that can be described as longbows. So my point is, if samurais used yumis that are long (which some did) then saying they used longbows is not incorrect. Nevertheless, thank you for letting us know what the Japanese called their bows, it was educational.