bristol physicists break 150 year old "law"

[WilbyInebriated]

like I said, 'you are neither right nor wrong'. nor am I, nor is anyone else.

right and wrong are subjective... are you suggesting science is subjective?

I stick to 'current' observations, until those observations are over written, I will stick with the tested laws of physics. like I said, things do change.

out with the 'old' laws and in with the 'updated' laws. everything gets updated. doesn't matter what.

theories jerry... not laws, at least not until you or someone else proves them.

if you would of had children then you would of been updated too? simple and sweet.

Jerry

'would have' not 'would of'... i thought you study to[sic] much to be wrong? updated? probably not...

no, it didn't take me that long at all. i just don't like people that THINK they "have studied to[sic] much to be wrong"... now unless you have something relevant to the topic please refrain from posting. if you can't do that, start your own thread on your opinion that theories are laws...

[onthecuttingedge2005]

right and wrong are subjective... are you suggesting science is subjective?

science observes and tests through physics, what is so hard about this?

theories jerry... not laws, at least not until you or someone else proves them.
probably not...

a law remains a law until it is not proven a law.

now unless you have something relevant to the topic please refrain from posting. if you can't do that, start your own thread on your opinion that theories are laws...

oh, I have plenty to share and my topic is as good as yours since this time has past.

so, I guess we 'both' have been rambling on then I guess.

so lets get back to the topic at hand. I'll hand you the ball Wilby.

Jerry

[WilbyInebriated]

science observes and tests through physics, what is so hard about this?

you avoided the question. it requires a yes or a no... nothing more. try again.

a law remains a law until it is not proven a law.

none of the "laws" you refer to have been proven to be inviolate, thus they are nothing more than theories... until you can prove otherwise, your opinion means nothing (except to you).

[onthecuttingedge2005]

you avoided the question. it requires a yes or a no... nothing more. try again.

wilby, my apologies, what was the question?

none of the "laws" you refer to have been proven to be inviolate, thus they are nothing more than theories... until you can prove otherwise, your opinion means nothing (except to you).

no, unless a theory is 'in' violation does it make it a non law. I would hate to see you get your self out of a speeding ticket, really, lol

luckily I know all the police, sheriff, chp and judges in this town or you'd be in trouble. lol

I'll never get a traffic ticket.

I don't bend the rules nor do I break them, I just follow the 'observed' rules.

simply because they are 'observed' doesn't make them breakable or unbreakable. it is possible to update the laws to make them better. some may not be unbreakable.

I think TensilKoala was my hero on this forum though he doesn't show up any more to much but he had a tenacity that rivals mine.

I am a very tenacious person myself. I think, I will never rival Tensilkoala for his knowledge and truth and arguments that he so deeply responds with at times.

observed truth is truth unless something well hidden is revealed. without observation there can be no truth and without absolute truth you are wrong.

maybe in time.

Jerry

[WilbyInebriated]

wilby, my apologies, what was the question?

scroll back up and find it...

no, unless a theory is 'in' violation does it make it a non law. I would hate to see you get your self out of a speeding ticket, really, lol

luckily I know all the police, sheriff, chp and judges in this town or you'd be in trouble. lol

I'll never get a traffic ticket.

I don't bend the rules nor do I break them, I just follow the 'observed' rules.

simply because they are 'observed' doesn't make them breakable or unbreakable. it is possible to update the laws to make them better. some may not be unbreakable.

Jerry

speeding tickets are irrelevant. if you can't respond without using red herrings and strawman logical fallacies, don't respond...

what is colloquially called 'laws' by academia are not laws at all. they are theories... until you can prove they cannot be violated EVER by ANYTHING. period.

you must have used that 'period' thing a lot with your kids didn't you? it doesn't work on me. you need to provide a cogent argument instead of logical fallacies... period.

next time you reply with a logical fallacy you make my ignore list...