Astronomy 101

Actually no. If you read what I said-- rather than rubbed your eyelids against your monitor to feel that oh-so pleasant heat, meanwhile slapping your penis against your keyboard in a configuration which you deem an intelligent response-- you would see that I never stated wormholes should not be considered astronomy. I said your post has little or nothing to do with astronomy. Your post is physics, theoretical sciences behind time travel, and maybe a brief and completely fantastic (as in pure fantasy) reference to black holes.

Physics can also be applied to the abhorrent weight of your mother, does that mean she's a planet, to be studied by astronomers? Well.... maybe, if the astronomer thinks she could sustain alien life...

Because of this sentence, I'm done debating with you after completing my reply. Any person who bases their debate off of "WELL PROVE IT DOESN'T EXIST LOL" is in league with every idiotic religious fanatic who says there's an invisible caring man floating about who created the universe, hang any evidence to prove otherwise because you can't prove he DOESN'T exist.

Google search "logical fallacies", since you're so keen to quote every trashy website to support your ludicrous arguments. More specifically "Burden of Proof".

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


Have you even read anything about general relativity? Like.... EVER? A 5th grader knows singularities are one of the few instances underwhich general relativity breaks down as a working theory. Even the idiots who create those god-awful internet memes understand that black holes disprove general relativity.

Example 1:

 

That was literally the most retarded reason you could have come up with for why my post should be considered physics. I'm done, fuck this, I can find more intelligent debates in a fucking merry-go-round.

 

kbai loooooool come back again for more verbal asswhooping. I'll be here year 'round

 

If you consider that an asswhooping you've got issues. I could talk shit in a bullshit language and have more valid arguments than you.

 

It's k if you can't refute my lexical pulverization, you don't have to be embarrassed



EDIT: that's also a VERY rich statement, coming from the guy who says general relativity supports the existence of black holes

 

General relativity allows for.... you know what, never mind. Enjoy your ignorance.

 

I don't get it, you intentionally post is if to continue a debate (you even start in a pseudo-intelligent fashion, despite the hilarity of what you were about to follow up with), instead you say (for the third time now) that you're done talking?

 

Well, we have a few confirmed things concerning observations of black holes. Like their mass ejections.

 

There is absolutely some object located where we say black holes are, whether they're black holes as we theorize them or not, there's no refuting there's SOMETHING there. Something large, with an unfathomable level of energy

That's all beside the point though, this debate sparked simply from my laughing at this guy calling time-travel "astronomy"

 

THREAD ON SPAM FORUM IS GETTING TO SERIOUS

 

a star is a sun m8. lol stupid kid m8 -.-

 

Nope Physics is not a branch of mathematics. Rather if you want to force a connection math is a branch of physics because math depends on the real world in order to exist the way it does and physics measures reality.
Honestly they're just separate though.

Also black holes count as astronomy, black holes can be observed via their emissions.

 

your 8 years old argument invalid, staaaaaaahp

 

lawl you're just as bad as that rx kid! I never said black holes weren't astronomy




WHAT I SAID WAS HIS SFA THREAD HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH ASTRONOMY SINCE THE FOCUS IS THE POSSIBILITY AND APPLICATIONS OF TIME TRAVEL, NOT THE EXISTANCE OF BLACK HOLES


clear enough? c:

also, sorry, a branch of science***** not math.

 

kids need to learn to admit when they're wrong lol

 

♥ testing

 

way to kill the thread, cruellex