geometry-and-trigonometry

[jaunty pine]

well it wasnt that hard but Its really long

[autumn swan]

Did they teach you?

[jaunty pine]

even though the teacher was giving us the answers-

[autumn swan]

Then how is it difficult?

[desert shell]

geometrics proofs 🤤

[slim plinth]

I’m not good at

[autumn swan]

?

[slim plinth]

Geometric proofs

[autumn swan]

What's a geometric proof?

[slim plinth]

Do u know CPCTC

And ASA, SSS, AAA, SAS

[desert shell]

showing why a geometric statement is true using prostulates

[desert shell]

yes the congruence rules

[autumn swan]

What is a postulate?

[autumn swan]

Congruence and similarity of triangle relationships?

[slim plinth]

Also with circles, and straight lines

[daring cedar]

yeah exactly you dont need to remember all the reference angles

[slim plinth]

Yep

[slim plinth]

I saw one where how they memorized trig values

It’s you write sin and cos on bottom

[autumn swan]

sohcahtoa

[autumn swan]

Circles have relationships too?

[desert shell]

rules specific to geometry

[slim plinth]

Write sin 0,1,2,3,4 and cos 4,3,2,1,0

And over two

[daring cedar]

no pi is exactly equal to the ratio of a circles diameter to its circumference

[slim plinth]

And then take sqrt on all

[jaunty pine]

it was really long

[daring cedar]

yes yes i use that for trig values

[jaunty pine]

oooo geometric proofs

[slim plinth]

And you know

[jaunty pine]

they are so satisfying

[autumn swan]

Oh okay

[slim plinth]

Write 30,45,60,90

[autumn swan]

How?

[slim plinth]

And you simplify

[slim plinth]

I have another trick

[jaunty pine]

rules, like ASA postulate, SSS postulate etc

[slim plinth]

1,2,3 on sin and cos, 3,2,1 as well

[desert shell]

any of u guys in an IB school?

[jaunty pine]

idk but when you find the answer its so good

[slim plinth]

And write 3,9,27

Sin and cos are over two and tan is over 3

[jaunty pine]

when you see that M is the midpoint of EJ so EM is congruent to MJ

[slim plinth]

And take the sqrt and simplify

[jaunty pine]

cbrt better

[slim plinth]

pi/4 radians

[autumn swan]

This does not make sense ngl

[slim plinth]

Thanks to my Landry machine

[autumn swan]

IS THAT A MICROWAVE?

[slim plinth]

After the trick it would looked like this

But sin on one row and cos on the bottom

That’s on my method

[daring cedar]

i use this method

then tan = sin/cos

[slim plinth]

Guess these

[jaunty pine]

what do they mean by x

in tan 90 degrees

[slim plinth]

Undefined

1/0

[slim plinth]

Also it’s a quadrantal angle

Lands on (0,1)

[daring cedar]

just like undefined

like a cross meaning you cant do it

[pallid swift]

Is this true that x = 5.9585

[daring cedar]

correct

[pallid swift]

Cause it shouls be 5 x tan(50°) because opposite and adjacent

[daring cedar]

5tan(50) = 5.95876...

[pallid swift]

Nice

[daring cedar]

although its not 5.9585 maybe you read your calc wrong

[pallid swift]

Oh i did i think

[daring cedar]

yeah

[pallid swift]

Yeah

[daring cedar]

its 5tan(50) anyways tho good job

[pallid swift]

Thanks :> Im starting to learn how to use trigonometry on triangles so my guided study teach printed me some papers to work on

[daring cedar]

thats cool, use the acronym sohcahtoa if you dont already know it

[pallid swift]

Yeah i know

[daring cedar]

yeah if you know that you should be set tbh

[pallid swift]

Alright

[winged oyster]

how do i rotate a point around the origin

[marsh marlin]

circle formula

analytical geometry

[winged oyster]

ok

[crude raft]

did i do it right 🥹

[potent hollow]

genius

unadulterated genius

[shrewd berry]

My mind has been blown

[spiral lodge]

Do not troll

[stuck onyx]

Is this right?

[cyan ravine]

the angles you've labelled are right, yes

[stuck onyx]

thanks I will continue practice.

[cyan ravine]

btw it's a good idea to translate the question to english

generally

[stuck onyx]

uh no, yeah, I haven't learn any math geometry in English. I will try next time

[ebon heart]

How do I solve this type of questions? (This is the solution btw) I ironically got a close answer that's 1432.4 after finding tan(2degrees) by first converting it into radians and then mistakenly taking that for it's tan because that's what you do for small radians (and 2degrees is not so small for comparison). Well after all that, I don't know how else to find answer to that equation or should I js rely on the online calculator?

[stuck onyx]

Determine by calculation whether the lines passing through points DE and AB are parallel. My answer is no

[silent plank]

what's your reasoning for saying no

[stuck onyx]

The lines A B and DE are not parallel to each other because the corresponding angles are of different sizes. Translated thro chatGBT

[silent plank]

don't recommend using AI for math

use your own reasoning
which angles on the pic do you think are corresponding?

[stuck onyx]

A and E not the same angle B D not the same angle?

[silent plank]

the pair A and E aren't corresponding angles
neither is B with D

[stuck onyx]

then my answer NO was right

[silent plank]

what notes are giving you that idea?

[silent plank]

no

[stuck onyx]

🙁 this is difficult. Grade 7 book question

[silent plank]

can you show your notes

on corresponding angles and parallel line theorems

[stuck onyx]

they are in Finnish 😄 brb

[quartz bronze]

can someone explain me power of a point

[silent plank]

corresponding angles by itself isn't specific to parallel lines
you'd first need to identify the correct pairs of angles (which you did not)
and then determine if those are equal to see if the lines are parallel

[stuck onyx]

Language difficulties... I ask my friend

[silent plank]

the math/diagrams themselves would be the same

[stuck onyx]

alright, I be back. I will think about it

[silent plank]

in this topic, you should see
F, C, Z/N
shapes

corresponding angles would be associated with the F shape

looking up at your previous problem, you applied corresponding angles correctly there

[daring cedar]

So is the answer yes

Or what

[silent plank]

Let the op try do it.

[daring cedar]

It has to be, right

[silent plank]

again, not going to give a direct answer,
let the op try do it / justify with their reasoning.

[stuck onyx]

There, I used Goodnotes to draw on it BE 50 and AD 59 "Yhdensuuntaiset"=corresponding angles same degrees

[silent plank]

yes, good the pair of green are corresponding
same as the pair of yellow

are each pair equal?
so are the lines DE and AB parallel?

[stuck onyx]

yes

[vocal sentinel]

Good teacher

[stuck onyx]

This took a while.

[pallid swift]

Wait I just realized, could you use trigonometry like (s/2) • tan(54°) in a pentagon to get apothem

[pallid swift]

And then from apothem and (s/2) circumradius = √(5.5² + 7.5²)

R = 9.300537619

[sly urchin]

Let H be an arbitrary point inside ∆ABC. Let ∆A'B'C' be the image of ∆ABC under a homothety with center H and an arbitrary ratio k. Let ∆XYZ be the medial triangle of the cevian triangle of H wrt ∆ABC. Prove that ∆A'B'C' and ∆XYZ are perspective.

[hollow plank]

Am I trippin?

[sly urchin]

I'm trying ||Trig Ceva w/ directed angles|| but it's messy

[sly urchin]

The original problem was:
∆ABC with altitudes AD,BE,CF concurrent at H. M,N,P are the midpoints of AH, BH, CH, resp. Prove the Gauss-Newton line of MFHE, NDHF, PEHD concur

I generalized it

So it's a bit messy

[hollow plank]

ohh i didnt understand anything btw

[sly urchin]

[hollow plank]

i am kinda dumb

and in lower grade than the concepts

[marsh marlin]

looks so dense

[sly urchin]

Which is why I generalized it

[marsh marlin]

Still looks dense

[tough grail]

Same

[sage wren]

anyone knows how they got the Radius of earth?

[exotic yarrow]

[https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/21543/how-have-we-measured-the-radius-of-the-earth-old-and-new]

[marsh marlin]

You can find it using the height of mount everest

In addition we can view it from space and get an estimated result

[sage wren]

how they measured the radius before satelites?

they knew the radius before satelites and it was pretty much accurate

to what they say it is now

[marsh marlin]

I think socrates measured it by doing smth with the sun and its shadow

[sage wren]

so he measured elevation angles from earth surface to the sun

but i tought angles dont curve

[sharp girder]

hyperbolic angles do

according to my friend in calculus BC:
sinh, cosh, tanh, etc. are all for doing sin, cos, tan, etc. for HYPERBOLIC angles

[sage wren]

but thats just a convertion from euclidian geometry

you can only mathematicaly convert it but it will violate the base principle of an angle

and also you wouldnt be able to measure it in degrees

an angle is 2 straight lines meeting at a vertex

they just give it the name "hyperbolic angle" but is not an angle and cannot be use as an angle measurment

whole Earth was mapped with latitude longitude from measuring elevation angles to the stars

they used Polaris the north star from Polaris Zenith (90 degree angle measurement to the North star) and sailed awawy from it until 0 degree angle and thats where they established the equator

thats how we got the latitude system with degrees

and Celestial Navigation uses a tool call sextant, you can find your way at sea or navigate the whole earth with that

There is a Celestial Navigation Almanac (a book) with 57 stars used

you can find out where you are at sea if you just measure elevation angles to 3 different stars and based on the degrees measured you will draw circles of equal altitude annd find exact locatiom where you are

they use this tool called sextant

right angle triangles are used in this

[daring cedar]

i have no clue what youre talking ab but that sounds sick

[sage wren]

that means the baseline of the angle is straight/ flat

so sea level flat

[daring cedar]

how does it show where you are? is it where they intersect?

[sage wren]

yes

you can use 2 stars

but for exact location you will use 3 stars

so 3 circles that intersect

they use a clock, a sextant and a compass

[daring cedar]

whos they?

[sage wren]

the mariners

[daring cedar]

oh ok

[sage wren]

before GPS invented

but they still have emergency sextants

in case gps fails

and some mariners still navigate like that out of passion

[daring cedar]

thats cool to know ngl

[sage wren]

who latitude system was measured with this method

yep

[daring cedar]

how does it actually work? what stars? how do they measure the angle? how do they sketch 3 circles?

[sage wren]

they have like a plotting sheet

the sextant is like a double lense with a arc of protractor you will align the sea level (horizon) to the star view and then read the angle

you also then calculate the dip angle from eye level to sea level

[daring cedar]

damn thats cool

interesting bro thanks for sharing

[sage wren]

welcome, hope you realize that this only works because earth is flat. It wouldnt work on a curving earth.

Elevation angles require a flat baseline

and we do measure them from sea level and use the to navigate earth

[daring cedar]

you purely believe the earth is flat?

[sage wren]

is just how its measured

measured flat always

[daring cedar]

well yeah on a small scale its flat

[sage wren]

at all scales

from Polaris GP ground position til 0 degree thats 5400 miles flat

at all scales and all types of measurements

is measured flat without exception

[daring cedar]

are you saying that, from a birds eye view, the earth is a circle

[sage wren]

what?

i dont know the shape of earth

i just know is flat

flat is an aspect not a shape

[daring cedar]

flat implies shape

[sage wren]

flat is an aspect

[daring cedar]

ok but by saying flat are you describing the earth as a cylinder?

[sage wren]

just flat

could be any shape

2D

but it spreads from North

to South in all directions

[daring cedar]

bro what?

[sage wren]

when you point South you dont point down do you?

you point in a direction

2D

[daring cedar]

no not conventionally?

[sage wren]

the compass is a 2 dimensional tool

[daring cedar]

2D implies the earth has no height

[sage wren]

its a single directionality

not curved

linear distance

distance is linear

there is no measured curvature of earth

[daring cedar]

well yes, because when you travel or move in a direction you move a distance

but technically youre moving on an arc of a circle

[sage wren]

in the globe model yes

but not in reality

[daring cedar]

yes in reality

[sage wren]

in reality we measure earth flat

in reality there are 0 curve measurments of earth

Earth us surveyed with triangulation, trilateration and trigonometry

and linear distances

[daring cedar]

isnt that obvious? there is no curvature because we see everything as flat

but its actually curved

[sage wren]

a right angle triangle is formed from the ground position of the north star

and an observer view at a 45 degrees angle

of the north star

[daring cedar]

we see stuff as flat

[sage wren]

the baseline is flat

[daring cedar]

so its measured as flat

[sage wren]

but we do navigate earth

using these elevation angle measurements

you cannot aquire an angle measurment if the baseline of the angle curves

[daring cedar]

yes, within eye sight the baseline of the angle is flat

but if you think theoretically like far enough its curved

[sage wren]

so you are saying its flat and then it curves

[daring cedar]

nope

im saying on an extremely small scale yes its flat

[sage wren]

celestial navigation uses circles of equal altitude at extremely big distances thousands of miles and give accurate location

[daring cedar]

if you like 500m ahead of you its flat, however 1000km ahead wouldnt be flat

[sage wren]

those are not small distances or scales

[daring cedar]

educate me then im geniunely curious

how does celestial navagation work

why does it work

and how can you represent 3d onto 2d

[daring cedar]

additionally, how accurate?

[sage wren]

i will share a short 13 minute youtube video

you watch it so you know what im talking about here

and then we can discuss more

https://youtu.be/mqD1uuNhuIY?is=kw7vzRT9fa_xT4wS

[daring cedar]

it doesnt directly pinpoint where things are

on paper yes where the circles intersect gives a location, but realistically the distance of where the ship actually could be looks like 100s of kms

[sage wren]

its accurate

it uses the latitude longitude system, compass, sextant, clock

[daring cedar]

the point is, if the earth was flat, where does it end? could you just walk off the edge?

[sage wren]

just check the video bro

so we can discuss about the cel nav

[marsh marlin]

Flat earth theories are stupid

Especially considering we have sattellite imagery

[daring cedar]

exactly its impractical

[sage wren]

who said anything about theories? im talking measurements here

[daring cedar]

well you said to watch a video attempting to prove the earth is flat

lol

[marsh marlin]

You cant measure a flat earth since it doesnt exist

[marsh marlin]

Yeah, seems like a waste of time

[sage wren]

is about celestial navigation

the whole earth was measured with elevation angles to the lights in the sky

you cannot aquire an elevation angle measurment from a curved baseline

angles dont curve

we can discuss the measurements and maybe get to a point with them

[marsh marlin]

In 3d they do curve

[daring cedar]

which is why its not precisely accurate???

because they do curve

thats the point

[marsh marlin]

In fact we can draw a 90 degree triangle on a sphere

[sage wren]

how do you measure the angle in degrees if the baseline curves then?

[daring cedar]

you assume its 2d on a smaller scale

[sage wren]

im talking North till equator scale

5400 miles

thats not small scale

and it still works

[daring cedar]

no where near accurately tho?

[sage wren]

thats how latitude system was created what you mean not accurate

[daring cedar]

not the one we use today probably not

[drifting cipher]

Mercator is inaccurate

[sage wren]

gps is based on surveyed land and cel nav

gps is cartesian system grid

derived from latitude and longitude and surveyed lands

[daring cedar]

regardless of gps, if we compare the first ever lat system to todays lat system its probably a lot different

[sage wren]

is same

every 69 miles moving away from North is 1 degree of latitude

and longitude is measured from latitude

equator is at 0 degree elevation angle measurment to the North star

[marsh marlin]

we can accurately measure it using sattelite imagery

all other ways are inefficient

[sage wren]

its measured flat

by surveyors

mariners

and GPS is cartesian system so 2D

[daring cedar]

yeah but is it as accurate as satelite imagery?

[sage wren]

the 3D is only a convertion from 2D

[sage wren]

You can look at photos and videos they give you and say is from satelites orbiting earth

and believe in the globe

based on those photos

but just know that earth is measured flat

thats how its measured alwyas

[daring cedar]

maybe 3000 years ago yeah

not now

[sage wren]

but gps is cartesian bro

and map scales are flat

cartesian system is 2D

[marsh marlin]

It looks flat sure

[sage wren]

so where is the curve measured?

[daring cedar]

yes bro because on a small scale curvature doesnt matter gravity keeps you on earth why is curvature relevant?

[marsh marlin]

but thats on an incredibly small scale

Zoom in enough to the earh and it will look flat

[sage wren]

at all scales earth is measured flat

[marsh marlin]

Approximation

[sage wren]

and maps are measured in squared miles

[marsh marlin]

And its an incredibly small difference

[sage wren]

where is the curve in the measurements

[marsh marlin]

We feel like earth is flat

[daring cedar]

this is a waste of time i got an exam tmrw, bro honestly your argument is futile

[sage wren]

okay so we only see the earth as a globe from satelite imagery

but where are the measured curves?

there is 0 measured curvature

[daring cedar]

hold on

is the earth flat?

yes or no

[sage wren]

thats how its measured

[daring cedar]

yes or no

stop waffling

[sage wren]

yes

[daring cedar]

yes or no

LOL

@marsh marlin

[sage wren]

sea level is horizontal

[daring cedar]

time to pack it in

the earth is flat guys

[sage wren]

elevation and altitude is measured from sea level

elevation 0

[daring cedar]

blind leading the blind

[sage wren]

sea level is paralel with eye level and surface level and flight level

altitude is measured perpendicular to sea level

is not that serious

[marsh marlin]

hm?

[sage wren]

i know is hard to grasp it

[daring cedar]

so you said the earth is flat correct?

[marsh marlin]

lmao

earth is flat?

we have satellite imagery bro im not repeating ts

[sage wren]

yes because its measured that way

[daring cedar]

if the earth is flat as you said; is the earth is a cylinder? or does it have no height?

[marsh marlin]

Fym measured

expand

[marsh marlin]

lol

[daring cedar]

scroll up he waffles about it birdy

[marsh marlin]

we can literally dig down into the earth

[sage wren]

any deviation from the horizontal baseline is measured with rise over run

[marsh marlin]

that means its a cylinder

[daring cedar]

hahahha

[marsh marlin]

With your logic

[daring cedar]

so the earth is a cylinder

[sage wren]

we dont measure a cilinder

we measure it flat

[marsh marlin]

Recently a guy travelled to antartica to prove the earth is round

[daring cedar]

???

[marsh marlin]

the sun is always shining there

that proves the earth is round

[sage wren]

so he traveled horizontaly in a linear distance toward south a horizontal linear direction

[marsh marlin]

…

[daring cedar]

no not actually

bro

[sage wren]

then where is the curve? who measured the curve?

[daring cedar]

are you stupid?

[sage wren]

if earth is curving we should have measurments of that curvature

but we dont

[marsh marlin]

idiot did you not read a single point we stated?

nice ragebait

[sage wren]

no need to use ad hominem

[daring cedar]

hahaha

[marsh marlin]

you and your stupid flat earth ideologies should go to antarctica and see for yourself

[daring cedar]

alr cool think about it like this

[sage wren]

you still failed to give me any measurements of a curve

[daring cedar]

is the length of the base of a triangle equal to the length of the hypotenuse?

yes or no

not waffle

[sage wren]

whats the hypotenuse?

[daring cedar]

sorry a right angled triangle

if you have this

[marsh marlin]

the longest side of a right angle triangle

[daring cedar]

no no but this is key

[marsh marlin]

Yup and place it on a sphere and it will bend

[daring cedar]

is the length of the hypotenuse equal to the length of the base?

yes or no

[sage wren]

is not

[marsh marlin]

No

[daring cedar]

ok thank you

but on a 3d scale from a birds eye view

the hypotenuse and base have the same length

point proven

ggwp

[marsh marlin]

LMAO

[sage wren]

ehat you mean 3d scale?

[daring cedar]

3d mate

[sage wren]

on a globe?

[daring cedar]

(x,y,z)

[marsh marlin]

read his points dude

Dont just speak for the heck of it

make useful statements

[daring cedar]

i need to go sleep

this argument is pointless

[sage wren]

you still didnt explain how you can aquire an elevation angle measurement from a curved baseline

[marsh marlin]

Bro

[sage wren]

a 45 degree elevation angle to the north star for example

[daring cedar]

curvature is not measured on small scales, youre travelling in a flat straight line due to gravity, so therefore imagine that occurring as you travel across the earth

[sage wren]

but you can use multiple circles of equal altitude

[daring cedar]

goodnight brother

[sage wren]

so that would be the whole earth

[daring cedar]

we discuss tomorrow

[sage wren]

not a small scale

[daring cedar]

birdy take over gng

[daring cedar]

which is inaccurate?

are you oaky

[marsh marlin]

nah im good fam

[sage wren]

not innacurate

latitude system is measured in degrees

in those degrees

[marsh marlin]

cya ryze

[daring cedar]

pinpoint a location from a piece of a4 paper thats 10cm by 10cm over 10000s of kms

cya bro

[sage wren]

the compass on the phone will give you these measurements too

[daring cedar]

pinpoint a location from a piece of a4 paper thats 30cm by 30cm over 10000s of kms

how are you managing that?

you cant

thats the point

the error interval is too big

[sage wren]

69 miles is 1 latitude degree

[daring cedar]

stop waffling

[daring cedar]

you cannot do this

precisely

and extremely accurately

[sage wren]

is not about being extremly accurate, is about the thing that it works to navigate the whole earth

how do you use these elevation angle measurments to navigate earth

you cannot do it on a curved surface

[daring cedar]

ok so its not accurate, so are you saying, as you stated that this was used to map the earth and is still used today, that the map of the earth is also wrong?

[sage wren]

is very accurate if done properly

but the earth was already measured

[daring cedar]

classify that precisely

what does "very" mean

[sage wren]

like 0.5 nautical miles accurate

[marsh marlin]

@sage wren do you agree gravity exists

[sage wren]

Wasnt proven

[daring cedar]

LMFAO

nah im actually done

[marsh marlin]

https://klipy.com/gifs/higuruma-sigh2

[sage wren]

but this is a geometry chat so

would preffer to talk about measurements

[daring cedar]

@sage wren ok let me ask you this

what keeps us on earth?

literally

when you jump

[sage wren]

density

[marsh marlin]

You turned this into an earth is round chat

[daring cedar]

why dont you float away

[sage wren]

we are denser than air

[marsh marlin]

That doesnt matter

[daring cedar]

so?

thats irrelevant lol

[marsh marlin]

if grsvity didnt exist we would all still float away

[sage wren]

thats your claim

[daring cedar]

and wait hold on

[sage wren]

but where is the scientific evidence

[marsh marlin]

Learn Newton and Einsteins works

[sage wren]

newton says mass attracts mass

[marsh marlin]

They have rigorous proofs

[sage wren]

clouds have mass and they are not going down

[marsh marlin]

Oho he says much more

[marsh marlin]

Its a gas

[sage wren]

the newtonian gravity says mass attracts mass

gas is mass too

[marsh marlin]

Yeah its mass is less than gravitys force

[sage wren]

less what?

[marsh marlin]

Ill end off here

[daring cedar]

brother its mass is less

[marsh marlin]

If youd like to continue learn gravity first

Bro ryze its fine

[daring cedar]

loool

[sage wren]

any evidence you can aqurie an elevation angle measurement from a curved baseline?

thats what i want to discuss for now

[daring cedar]

alr cool ill end off here too

[sage wren]

if you got anything on these just write here

will chat later maybe tomorrow

[marsh marlin]

no we will not

[daring cedar]

we are held to the earth because we are denser than air

https://tenor.com/view/ishowspeed-nodding-nod-yes-fortnite-gif-6620789258176886532

[sage wren]

in Cel Nav they do use elevation angles to navigate the oceans and yes an angle is not curving

[daring cedar]

stop tryna talk about that

does gravity exist?

yes or no

[sage wren]

you tried to change subject to run away from the elevation angle measurement

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist?
yes or no

[sage wren]

so waiting you to adreess that first

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist?
yes or no

just answer yes or no

[sage wren]

thats how you measure your elevation angle?

[daring cedar]

brother does gravity exist

yes or no

[sage wren]

why you ask me?

about gravity?

[daring cedar]

im asking you a simple question

does gravity exist

[sage wren]

you have a claim to make?

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist

[marsh marlin]

Because we can prove it simply from gravity

Gravity has been proved

[daring cedar]

no waffle does gravity exist

[sage wren]

if you want to support gravity then bring up the scientific method and show how it proved gravity

[daring cedar]

i never said i support it

[marsh marlin]

Therefore you answer yes, then the earth is round
If no, then research gravity

[daring cedar]

im asking you a question

[marsh marlin]

Search it yourself you chud

[daring cedar]

asking a question does not mean i support it

simple as

does gravity exist?

[sage wren]

gravity as a force that attracts mass no

[daring cedar]

no no

stop trying to classify it

does gravity exist

yes or no

[marsh marlin]

Answer this simple question then we are done

[daring cedar]

you do not need to give a definition or attempt to classify your answer

[marsh marlin]

If you dont answer it we are done

[sage wren]

im not denying things are not falling down

[daring cedar]

never said that

[sage wren]

but not all things go down

[marsh marlin]

no

[daring cedar]

im asking a question

[marsh marlin]

yes or no

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist

yes or no

one more word

[sage wren]

both Newtonian and Einsteinien gravity were never proven so no, they dont exist

just some concepts

[daring cedar]

you do not need to give a definition or attempt to classify your answer

you do not need to give a definition or attempt to classify your answer

you do not need to give a definition or attempt to classify your answer

you do not need to give a definition or attempt to classify your answer

yes or no

[sage wren]

.

[marsh marlin]

Gravity has been proven

[daring cedar]

just type no

[autumn moat]

does not make u win an argument bro

[daring cedar]

please no classification

[sage wren]

then show how

[marsh marlin]

Dude search it yourself

Stop treating us like scientists

[daring cedar]

a yes or no question does not need additionally waffle

[sage wren]

i did, and its not proven with the scientific method

[daring cedar]

so no then yeah?

[autumn moat]

its a yes for me

[marsh marlin]

Look at the context

[daring cedar]

no one asked you but okay fair enough mate

yes or no @sage wren

[sage wren]

Scientific method deals with observing natural phenomena and establishing the cause

[daring cedar]

bro

just stop talking

[sage wren]

gravity was never proven

[daring cedar]

so no yeah?

[sage wren]

no

[daring cedar]

no gravity does not exist correct?

[autumn moat]

its a public channel wdym bro

[sage wren]

what is gravity for you?

[daring cedar]

0/10 ragebait

does gravity exist

one last time

yes or no

[autumn moat]

lol

[daring cedar]

mbmb

[sage wren]

what is gravity for you?

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist

[sage wren]

a force that attracts mass to the center of earth?

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist? yes or no

[marsh marlin]

Answer the quesiton @sage wren

[sage wren]

if this is what gravity is for you then no it does not exist

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist? yes or no

[sage wren]

i already did

[marsh marlin]

Stop rebuttling and answer the question

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist? yes or no answer only. no waffle allowed

[marsh marlin]

Restate it

[daring cedar]

does gravity exist? yes or no answer only. no waffle allowed

[sage wren]

no

[daring cedar]

ggwp

goodnight

[autumn moat]

lol

[marsh marlin]

Cya

[daring cedar]

cya

[autumn moat]

imma dip too

[marsh marlin]

R u in canada by chance

[marsh marlin]

cya

[daring cedar]

nah uk bro

[marsh marlin]

Alr cya

[daring cedar]

cya

https://klipy.com/gifs/higuruma-sigh2

[sage wren]

Any evidence you can aquire an elevation angle measurement from a curved baseline?

Or any evidence of gravity?

[autumn moat]

go outside and throw something

[sage wren]

any evidence the reasons why some thing fall is due to a force that pulls them to the center of earth?

[autumn moat]

yo bro go play some angry birds

alr

[sage wren]

you chose to use Red herring and ad hominem fallacy instead of showing any evidence

I dont want to go into science here guys

lets stick to geometry

any evidence we can aquire an elevation angle measurements from a curved baseline and use the measurement to navigate earth?

We know already that we do navigate and measure earth using this method so any evidence it would work on a globe?

[winged oyster]

i love solving everything through coordinate geometry

[hazy harbor]

you meant complex right

[dawn pond]

Has anyone ever taken a moment to appreciate how beautiful the circle formula is

[daring sierra]

hmm...

dam

[dawn pond]

It's quite a gorgeous formula

[sage wren]

greetings, anyone managed to figure this out?

[winged oyster]

no

unless thats what it is

i just pretend its a coordinate plane and plot everything

[daring sierra]

maibe

[sage wren]

where is the scientific method that proves gravity, i wanna see it

[daring sierra]

you see

[sage wren]

you will see its flawed

[daring sierra]

everything falls down

so uh

its true

there is gravity!

trust

[sage wren]

you just made an observation that things fall down, i asked you to prove the cause of it

[daring sierra]

hmm

mass

uh

i thik

[sage wren]

mass attracts mass?

[daring sierra]

hm

ig you can say that?

[sage wren]

clouds have mass? helium has mass?

[daring sierra]

gravity is weak

[sage wren]

do you see them going down?

[sage wren]

you need to prove it exists before saying its weak

[daring sierra]

other forces are much more stronger

for example

take a magnet as large as the earth

how strong do you think it will be?

[sage wren]

we can prove magnets

but we need to prove gravity before comparing it to other forces

Science uses the scientific method to prove things

Scientific method:

1. Observe natural phenomena ( an event happening in nature)
2. Question what caused it
3. hypothesis ( make a guess on what would be the cause)
4. dependent variable ( the specific factor being measured, tested, or observed in an experiment or study)
5. independent variable (the specific factor manipulated, changed, or selected by a researcher in an experiment to evaluate its effect on dependent variable)

if changes made to the independent variable affects the dependent variable then hypothesis is supported, if no changes are observed in the dependent variable after manipulating the independent variable then hypothesis not supported.

6. Conclusion ( it will always prove a positive or a negative)

This is the scientific method, is the empirical way to prove things in nature, gravity was not proven positive with this.

[winged oyster]

they go down because of the gravitational pull of the earth

or something like that

[sage wren]

thats just a claim.
check the scientific method above, and try to apply it to gravity.

[tiny acorn]

1 apple falls
2 hmmmm why is it
3 someone thinks its due to some force pulling everything down (gravity)
4 shi falling or not
5 height
6 shi always falls therefore gravity exists

[ripe prairie]

Can anyone hit me hard with high logic geometry question

[daring sierra]

distance would be a better term instead of height

[tiny acorn]

I mean height is commonly used for vertical distance

[daring sierra]

height is distance

distance is more general

[tiny acorn]

Still for this use case i think height is more suitable

[daring sierra]

hmm

what will you do in space?

[tiny acorn]

?

Exists?

[daring sierra]

uh idk

you can use height but distance is just a better term

[tiny acorn]

I dont see how this is better

So yeah

[daring sierra]

dem

[daring sierra]

in general

we use radius

in the gravity formula

distance can be used for radius

thus

distance is better

while height can technically be true...

i think distance is better

[tiny acorn]

Yes but this is just an intuitive example not full blown math formula, also saying "distance is better bcz its used in formula" is just appeal to authority (guy who wrote it as that)

[daring sierra]

its not authority

its generality

we need to be general for terms

[tiny acorn]

I am talking specific use case

Not general

[daring sierra]

i am talking for general stuffs

[tiny acorn]

So we are talking about different things? Sighs

Ig your right on that part

But why would you nitpick some detail like that?

[daring sierra]

we are talking about the same thing

[daring sierra]

idk

confusion not good in science

[tiny acorn]

I dont think so

[daring sierra]

we must have general term for a thing

[tiny acorn]

Height is perfectly understandable in this case

[daring sierra]

it is

[tiny acorn]

If it works it works duh

[daring sierra]

it definitely is

[daring sierra]

b-but the einstien guy used distance

🥺

[tiny acorn]

Appeal to authority (in this case einstein)

[daring sierra]

appeal to generality

correction

in math and in science

the term that is used the most is used

most of the terms we use in math can also be considered appeal to authority by your logic

you forgot euler?

[tiny acorn]

Nope

Also how tf does euler relate here

Eulers number is just a name

For a number

But "height" is also just a name for the distance to the ground smh

I just call it that and people just understand it lmao

Actually distance is even more confusing than height

As distance to what?

[daring sierra]

bro

f(x) is euler's notation

i that is used for imaginary number is also euler's notation

pi was also influenced by euler

euler used 2pi before that

[daring sierra]

also

YOU define distance

distance from earth to sun

distance from eiffel tower to the groud

anything

your argument is baseless

i am not attacking

so dont take it personally

i am just trying to show a logical argument

[tiny acorn]

Height is implicity distance to ground. There is nothing confusing about it. I think in this case "distance" is more confusing and not appropriate for my example. This is my point and your trying to say that i should use "distance" because its more general.

[daring sierra]

good enough

[tiny acorn]

Generality != usefulness in my case

[daring sierra]

hmm

also true

but yeah

uh

i accept it

[tiny acorn]

Ok

[daring sierra]

for other stuffs i think distance is better but relative to groud height is better

[tiny acorn]

This

[daring sierra]

gravity is just acceleration

height is good

[daring sierra]

talking about earth in general btw

[hollow lily]

<@&268886789983436800>

[daring sierra]

not for ALL of the gravitational phenomenon

[tiny acorn]

<@&268886789983436800>

[tiny acorn]

Ok

[daring sierra]

:]

[sage wren]

1. apple falls
   2.what caused it
2. a force pulling mass towards center of earth
3. a measured maximum acceleration rate of 9.8m/s^2
4. height dropped from, weight, size, shape of object.
5. conclusion independent variable does not affect the dependent therefore gravity not proven, hypothesis not supported

[daring sierra]

yey

[tiny acorn]

Damn 2 came at the same time?

[sage wren]

also clouds and gases are also mass and they dont go down

[daring sierra]

why was his message deleted?

[tiny acorn]

Advertising

[daring sierra]

ah

[daring sierra]

argument closed

https://tenor.com/view/gavel-order-in-court-court-is-settled-phoenix-wright-ace-attorney-gif-16543922

[tiny acorn]

No. 4 means such a force exists and is applied to the object regardless of height dropped, weight, size, shape,... Therefore 6

We know a force is needed to accelerate shi

[daring sierra]

uh huh

[tiny acorn]

And gravity is just the name we gave to such force

[daring sierra]

uh huh huh

[sage wren]

you failed to manipulate the dependent with the independent so therefore you cannot prove your hypothesis

thats how scientific method proves

[tiny acorn]

huh interesting

[sage wren]

also mass does not always attracts mass

as you can see the clouds not falling

or helium going up

[tiny acorn]

havent thought of that

[sage wren]

Also there is another issue

your hypothesis says a force pulling mass to the "Center" of earth

that is an assumption that earth is a sphere

you need to know the Radius of that sphere

how was the Radius measured?

[daring sierra]

nuh uh

[daring sierra]

your argument is assuming a perfect sphere

earth's gravity is not perfect

or wait

it is

maybe no but yeah

you get the point

the earth as an overall structure pulls everything down'

[sage wren]

those are just claims, not facts

[daring sierra]

also as for the clouds

[daring sierra]

einstine

clouds dont fall because of the rising air

you can google it

[sage wren]

Einstein gravity superseded Newtonian gravity

[daring sierra]

yes

[sage wren]

clouds dont fall and helium does not go down, hot air balloon goes up too

[daring sierra]

and it says that earth makes a curvature due to its mass

[sage wren]

an apple dropped from under the water will rise to the surface

as you can see there are many examples of mass not attracting mass

[daring sierra]

what do you mean by this?

there are separate phenomenons for those things

[sage wren]

helium is also mass and does not go down

[daring sierra]

it depends

same logic as air

if an item is light than water

it will come up

go on drop a heavy stone and see

[sage wren]

yes so did you get my point?

mass does not always attracts mass

thats the point

[daring sierra]

false

mass attracts mass

however

[sage wren]

can you prove it?

[daring sierra]

your argument is forgetting that other forces exist too

[sage wren]

with the scientific method?

[daring sierra]

ok ok

show me the method

i aint going up to find it

alr

so uh

imma come here after eating food

I WILL PROVE YOU WRONG

[sage wren]

i write it above, i will reply to it

[daring sierra]

okay okay

[sage wren]

here

[daring sierra]

thnx broski

[sage wren]

You need to prove that you are right

[daring sierra]

Alright. Here we go:

1. Newton observed and though that the old aristotle mechanics was flawed. So he decided to make a better system and used force.
2. He thought if there is force behind every acceleration. Then what if the same force is acted upon us on earth that we see as a downward push? He called that gravity.
3. He hypothsized that the same force that he called gravity that is behind the downward pus we feel is also behind the orbit of the earth and pretty much everything held by the sun and the same with the whole universe?
4. The things that he believed that the dependent variable is g which is the gravitational potential. He hypothsized that g directly proportional to mM/(d squared).
5. It is clear from the gravitational potential equation that the independent variables are mass and distance.
6. After the experiments, he concluded that he was in fact right. Gravity really is the thing that pulls us and everything close.

oops

i accidentally pressed enter

@sage wren

there

[daring sierra]

here

imma go enjoy my sweet victory

AHAHAHAHHAAH

L bozo

[sage wren]

in order to support your hypothesis, your independent variable needs to be manipulated and affect the dependent variable wich in your example it does not

also the step 1 is to observe natural phenomena wich is simply things falling to the ground

also you cannot include the center of earth without the known Radius of earth

that means you are assuming earth is a sphere without proving it

your scuentific method example is completely flawed

heres how he official scientific method applied to gravity looks like

1. Objects falling to the ground
2. what caused it
   3.a force pulling mass to center of earth
   4.a measured acceleration rate of maximum 9.8m/s^2
3. height dropped from,size,weight,shape of object.

Changing the independent variable does not affect the dependent variable.
6. conclusion, hypothesis not supported

Also how did they measure the radius of earth? Spoiler alert: they didnt measure any radius

@daring sierra

[daring sierra]

What...

it is alreaady proved

fym

it was known since the ancient times

not even joking

[sage wren]

How did they measuee the Radius of earth?

[daring sierra]

using...

TRIGNOMETRYYY

there is actually a great video by 3b1b on this

it features terry tao too

[sage wren]

any evidence you can do trigonometry on a curved surface?

that only works on flat earth

[daring sierra]

nop

watch the vid

[sage wren]

an angle requires 2 straight lines meeting at a vertex

[daring sierra]

bru

I SAID WATCH

OR I WILL DISINTEGRATE YOU

[sage wren]

a triangle is 3 lines connecting to form 3 angles with a 180 degrees sum

[sage wren]

i already know how they "measure it"

[daring sierra]

good

[sage wren]

they didnt they just measured elevation angles

you cannot aquire an elevation angle measurement from a curved baseline

[daring sierra]

awh man

[sage wren]

earth must be flat and it is in order for elevation angle measueements to work

[daring sierra]

i need to go

uhhh

i will tell more about this when i come

uhhh

[sage wren]

Any evidence you can aquire an rlevation angle measurement from a curved baseline?

[daring cedar]

Arguing with @sage wren is pointless dont waste your timr

Time

[sage wren]

yet you all failed to show evidence of gravity using the scientific method

should be easy right? yet i see you have alot of flaws

changes made to the independent variable needs to affect the dependent variable in order for hypothesis to be supported.Is very simple.

if we are talking science

if Not.. then is pseudo science

[upper karma]

https://tenor.com/view/is-this-ragebait-ragebait-isthisragebair-gif-11742088613823098929

[sage wren]

is not ragebait, its called cognitive dissonance what you are experiencing

[upper karma]

,w define dissonance

[somber coyote]

Results provided by WolframAlpha

Click here to refine your query online
Upgrade to WolframAlpha Pro!

Requested by _ven.geance

[daring cedar]

8king also, the point is they didnt measure an angle from a curved baseline

Youre misunderstanding things

[sage wren]

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort caused by holding a belief that conflicts with evidence or facts, leading to mental tension or rationalization.

[sage wren]

yes i know, they measured the angle from a flat baseline

[daring cedar]

They did not use a single flat baseline from the north pole to the equator, angle measurements are taken from the local horizon at that position

[sage wren]

so from earth surface then

[daring cedar]

The change in angles over distance is what proves the earth is curved lol

[sage wren]

an angle requires 2 straight lines

you got the earth surface and line of sight to a star

angle drops due to increasing distance

an angle does not curve

[daring cedar]

.

[sage wren]

does an angle curve?

[daring cedar]

Are you dumb?

[sage wren]

in celestial navigation, we use the horizontal baseline as part of the angle

an angle does not curve

[sage wren]

instead of ad hominem logical fallacies you could adress the matter

[daring cedar]

An angle does use two straight lines and thats exactly whats happening, the line of sight to the star is one straight line, and the other is your local horizontal line, that tangent is straight, not curved. Youre not using the whole earth as a baseline, just the tiny flat bit at your location

Im addressing it mate

[sage wren]

just a tiny bit? how long? 🤣

[daring cedar]

The angle measurement is local, not across the whole earth

[sage wren]

how long is the tiny bit you are using, tell me in distance

?

[daring cedar]

There isnt a fixed distance

[sage wren]

approx

[daring cedar]

Its flat locally

[sage wren]

tell me a distance

[daring cedar]

The direction of the tangent at your position changes as you move

[sage wren]

so you are using a tangent plane

then is not Earth that you are measuring in that case

you say your local horizon is flat and then after a distance it curves? 🤣

[daring cedar]

Bro key word

[daring cedar]

Locally

[sage wren]

thats a tangent

couldnt work

you are not measuring earth then

a tangent is a point to a sphere

[daring cedar]

Yes imagine that over every single unit of distance

[sage wren]

a line to a sphere touching at a single point

thats not a line is a point then

can you make an angle from a point and a line?

[daring cedar]

No no let me speak

[sage wren]

you need 2 lines

[daring cedar]

Listen

You have two lines and those two lines are measured at every single point on earth so yes it is tangential LOCALLY

Locally you smart guy

[sage wren]

Saying that we measure from a tangent plane means we are not measuring from earth surface then

you cannot navigate earth using a random angle

is not just an angle is an "elevation" angle

elevation of surface level

measured perpendicular to surface

from 90 degrees to 0 in Cel Nav

[daring cedar]

Okay? So youre measuring the elevation angle locally and it changes as you move

[sage wren]

A tangent plane is imaginary.

[daring cedar]

Locally brk

Locally

[sage wren]

is a plane in the outter space

the only part of a tangent plane is where you are sitting

so your feet a point

how you you neasure an angle with a point and a line

[daring cedar]

You draw a tangent from where the point is on your foot?

Are u dumb?

[sage wren]

that tangent is imaginary, correct?

[daring cedar]

The tangent is from the point, the point is not the tangent

[sage wren]

is the tangent line physical?

[daring cedar]

Well no i cant walk on the tangent line and fuck off into space can i mate

[sage wren]

so how do you use a tangent to navigate earth

if the tangent is imaginary

spreading into outter space

[daring cedar]

Once again, youre using two lines so you can measure the angle

[sage wren]

you are measuring an angle eith an imaginary tangent line stretching into space.

then you have no elevation angle measurement of earth

do you?

you need to use earth surface as part of your baseline of angle in order to navigate earth

thats the point of measuring the elevation angle

for navigation

you are not navigating the tangent line

[daring cedar]

Bro are u dumb?

The tangent is at the point you are on the earths surface