You must log in or register to comment.
- Glytch@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
And this is why absolute statements are generally bad arguments. It only takes one example to disprove them.
- Dayroom7485@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
That‘s the worst part: at atomic scale, the fucker is made out of smaller… cubes
https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/crystal-structure-of-pyrite-3add26cf08b74346afb1d689c78b7144
- 3 months
The dual is kinda the exact opposite, by definition. From an orthogonal perspective, cube is the wrongest possible word.
- bitteroldcoot@piefed.socialEnglish4 months
Worked as a physicist for 30 years, nobody talks like that. Everyone else in the room is to smart, and will slap you down for using absolutes.
- 4 months
no science teacher would ever say that.
Light travels in a straight line, plenty of crystals, linear erosion, many trees evolved to be as straight as possible…
and to be esoteric, every object path, even when gravity affects them (they travel in a perfectly straight line, but it is spacetime that is curved).
- PapaStevesy@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
It travels in a straight line, just not in every dimension. Look at a waveform from above, it’s a straight line.
- 4 months
they do tavel in a perfectly straight line though.
space time is curved, not the light path.
4 monthsI don’t think that’s right because they are affected by gravity, even if ever so slightly
- Maldreamer@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
But isn’t the gravity bending the space, so the light itself is travelling straight but seems curved to the observer?
Hmm, I’m not actually sure. Are we also ignoring refraction and reflection because the path is straight between those? If we’re talking discrete photons, you may be correct about each segment in its path being perfectly straight, but I’m not a theoretical physicist.
- Krudler@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
We can say that spatially, the summation of the photons movement is linear, but everything in the universe is waves and curves and we all know that to be true
- 4 months
if by straight you mean a perfect eucledian line, then there’s no such thing as a perfect line in nature or reality.
as that might violate the Eisenberg Uncertainty principle. because if I know two points position or or if I know the direction and one point I’ll know the position and direction of every point.
but then that’s too esoteric.
- Krudler@lemmy.worldEnglish4 months
You are clearly full of shit and have no idea what you’re talking about, and your flip-flopping between positions
- 4 months
it’s a meme channel, it’s a stupid question, you get stupid answers.
I’m not putting my name in a paper saying definitely of straight exist in nature.
- 4 months
you literally have the power to shut people up at will, just block em, faster and more effective.
