Public Education And Independent Self-Taught Research

[wellwisher]

Education is useful to help one build a platform for further study, but this alone does not teach you everything there is to know. The cutting edge stuff is often a work in progress, protected by researchers, by government classification standards; top secret, by patents and copyrights and by legal boilerplate and company trade secrets. What is placed in the box for education is the old cutting edge, that is now beyond the need for such protections. At one time nuclear was top secret stuff that was not in the box. Now enough time has passed and it can added to the box.

If you went to work helping to design the iPhone of the future; #25, what is in the box at the store, today, is not the same as these new designs that are kept in a vault. They exist, but do not exist.

Too many people seem to assume if you memorize the box of today you are an expert and critic to anything not part of the box. The box is only that part of the iceberg that is above the water line. It is good to be open minded, One has to avoid both collective and personal bias, to begin see the iceberg below the water.

 

[Native]

When you refuse to learn the simplest of concepts and then try to launch an attack because you couldn't get a joke what else do you expect?

Are you yet been updated on "supernovas exploding several times in a row"?

 

[Native]

I just looked it up. The average solar wind at the Earth consists of 3 to 10 particles per cubic centimeter. Now, that is high compared to the average density in outer space, which is about 1 atom per cubic meter. But at sea level, the Earth's atmosphere has about 26 quintillion molecules per cubic centimeter.

And you STILL forget to count on and include the Earth´s size and orbital velocity.

 

[Native]

Not at all. Please present some facts. Please present some actual discoveries. And the newness of an idea doesn't make it correct.

Apparently, idea newnesses even doesn´t seem to bother some persons at all.

There is a difference between dogma (which ignores facts) and discoveries (which are based on facts). Science education is based on the facts we have discovered.

Give me a reasonable break will you? 70 % dark matter, and 25 % dark energy which isn´t accounted for!? But maybe you didn´t mean the astrophysical and cosmological science?

I am not ignoring either the size of the Earth or Moon, nor their orbital velocities.

But then in your next sentence:

Size and velocity have little to do with each other.

As said before: You´re sidestepping the critical questions and coming with inconsistent, disconnected, and even contradictionary arguments.

 

[Native]

Please go and learn some basic physics. Even learning the difference between velocity and acceleration and that F=ma would go a long way. Getting F=GMm/r^2 would be very helpful as well.

Quote from - Physical Class Room Lesson:

Question: "Wouldn't an elephant free-fall faster than a mouse?
# 1 This question is a reasonable inquiry that is probably based in part upon personal observations made of falling objects in the physical world.
# 2 After all, nearly everyone has observed the difference in the rate of fall of a single piece of paper (or similar object) and a textbook.
# 3 The two objects clearly travel to the ground at different rates - with the more massive book falling faster".

The Physical Class Room Lesson then concludes:
# 4 "The answer to the question (doesn't a more massive object accelerate at a greater rate than a less massive object?) is absolutely not".

Me: No, it´s only in the real physical world (# 1-2-3) away from mathematical equations and calculations and artificial vacuum experiments that objects behave naturally, and some natural elements aren´t falling at all.

Why on Earth should one ever go to clasrooms and learn such illogical and disconnected Public Education mental construct nonsense?

 

[Native]

What is placed in the box for education is the old cutting edge, that is now beyond the need for such protections.

Sure so, but why should it even be protected in the first place?

Too many people seem to assume if you memorize the box of today you are an expert and critic to anything not part of the box. The box is only that part of the iceberg that is above the water line. It is good to be open minded, One has to avoid both collective and personal bias, to begin see the iceberg below the water.

Thanks, I couldn´t have said it better myself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you yet been updated on "supernovas exploding several times in a row"?

Drop it. What I linked had nothing to do with supernovae. It was a joke that you did not get.

Do you need it explained to you?

 

[Polymath257]

And you STILL forget to count on and include the Earth´s size and orbital velocity.

How is that relevant? the Earth is about 13 thousand kilometers across and has a velocity of about 30 km/s in its orbit.

So?

 

[Polymath257]

Quote from - Physical Class Room Lesson:

Question: "Wouldn't an elephant free-fall faster than a mouse?
# 1 This question is a reasonable inquiry that is probably based in part upon personal observations made of falling objects in the physical world.

Not in a vacuum, I would not.

# 2 After all, nearly everyone has observed the difference in the rate of fall of a single piece of paper (or similar object) and a textbook.

And they would fall at the same rate in a vacuum. It is only air resistance that makes them fall slower.

# 3 The two objects clearly travel to the ground at different rates - with the more massive book falling faster".

Not in a vacuum: only in the unnatural presence of air.

The Physical Class Room Lesson then concludes:
# 4

"The answer to the question (doesn't a more massive object accelerate at a greater rate than a less massive object?) is absolutely not".

Me: No, it´s only in the real physical world (# 1-2-3) away from mathematical equations and calculations and artificial vacuum experiments that objects behave naturally, and some natural elements aren´t falling at all.

Why on Earth should one ever go to clasrooms and learn such illogical and disconnected Public Education mental construct nonsense?

Why would you include air resistance when looking at the dominant reason things fall?

 

[Native]

Sub OP: Educational analysis and logics for neards.

Watch Ron Hatch discerning cosmological facts from fictions in this video:

Even the mathematical neards should be satisfied here

 

[Native]

Drop it. What I linked had nothing to do with supernovae. It was a joke that you did not get.
Do you need it explained to you?

You surely earlier linked to a supernova. Do I really have to point out what you earlier posted?

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
And you STILL forget to count on and include the Earth´s size and orbital velocity.

How is that relevant? the Earth is about 13 thousand kilometers across and has a velocity of about 30 km/s in its orbit.
So?

Because this is the cause of the resistance PRESSURE on the Earth, alias Newtons assumed PULL.

 

[Native]

Not in a vacuum, I would not.

And they would fall at the same rate in a vacuum.

It is only air resistance that makes them fall slower.

Not in a vacuum: only in the unnatural presence of air.

Why would you include air resistance when looking at the dominant reason things fall?

Tree times you´re deriving from the linked Class Room explanations, just in order to be biasedly opposing and avoiding the illogics and inconsistencies in the class room nonsense.

Why would you include air resistance when looking at the dominant reason things fall?

EDIT: I´ve told you several times now of the overall spacial pressures, but it seems that you’re willingly ignorant by bias.

BTW: Why would you include air resistance forces when reentering a spacecraft?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You surely earlier linked to a supernova. Do I really have to point out what you earlier posted?

No, seriously, go back and watch that video again. What country do you live in?

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
You surely earlier linked to a supernova. Do I really have to point out what you earlier posted?

No, seriously, go back and watch that video again. What country do you live in?

OK, sorry for taking your childish gamer video as a serious video about real exploding stars.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Native said: ↑
You surely earlier linked to a supernova. Do I really have to point out what you earlier posted?

OK, sorry for taking your childish gamer video as a serious video about real exploding stars.

It was not a "gamer video". Seriously, where did you grow up? Nor was my use of it childish. It appears that you did not get the joke. Sound does not travel through space.

 

[Polymath257]

Native said: ↑
And you STILL forget to count on and include the Earth´s size and orbital velocity.

Because this is the cause of the resistance PRESSURE on the Earth, alias Newtons assumed PULL.

No, there is no resistance because there is nothing to resist it. The space around the Earth is a vacuum to a very high degree (as I pointed out, even with solar wind there is only 3-10 molecules per cubic centimeter--hardly enough to cause a resistance to the motion of the Earth of any significant degree).

And the 'pull' from gravity is in the direction of the sun. So the change is velocity from that force is what keeps the Earth in orbit.

 

[Polymath257]

Tree times you´re deriving from the linked Class Room explanations, just in order to be biasedly opposing and avoiding the illogics and inconsistencies in the class room nonsense.

No, those numbers were the result of actual measurements. Sorry, but your philosophical musings don't win against that.

EDIT: I´ve told you several times now of the overall spacial pressures, but it seems that you’re willingly ignorant by bias.

No, I am not ignorant. I simply know you are incorrect here. There is no pressure in space. Go 200 kilometers above the surface of the Earth and you have a very good vacuum. In fact, it is better than anything produced on the ground.

BTW: Why would you include air resistance forces when reentering a spacecraft?

Because you need to know how much that resistance slows the spacecraft. Also, if you go too fast, you can get an effect like skipping a stone off of water.

You need to include everything: but the air resistance is only relevant once the spacecraft gets to the atmosphere, which is close to the Earth. If the spacecraft is over a couple hundred kilometers up, there is no such resistance.

 

[Native]

Sound does not travel through space.

Just posting a video without writing what is is about, don´t catch my attention very much. Your video title clearly talked about an exploding star.

About sound:
Why don´t you get updated before claiming something about sound?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just posting a video without writing what is is about, don´t catch my attention very much. Your video title clearly talked about a exploding star.

About sound:
Why don´t you get updated before claiming something about sound?

No, the Death ,Star was not a star. That was just a nickname for it.

Are you claiming that you never saw Star Wars?