Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180279 comments on the www.scientificblogging.com story from Feb 24, 2008, titled Should evolution be taught in high school?. In it, www.scientificblogging.com reports that:

Microbiologist Carl Woese is well known as an iconoclast. At 79 years of age, Woese is still shaking things up. Most recently, he stated in an interview with Wired that...

"My feeling is that evolution shouldn't be taught at the lower grades. You don't teach quantum mechanics in the grade schools. One has to be quite educated to work with these concepts; what they pass on as evolution in high schools is nothing but repetitious tripe that teachers don't understand."

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.scientificblogging.com.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#109816 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Here's the article:
NASA's Gravity Probe B (GP-B) mission has confirmed TWO KEY predictions derived from Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which the spacecraft was designed to test. The experiment, launched in 2004, used four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure the hypothesized geodetic effect, the warping of space and time around a gravitational body, AND frame-dragging, the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates. GP-B determined both effects with unprecedented precision by pointing at a single star, IM Pegasi, while in a polar orbit around Earth.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/
You will note in you article's words that warping of space time around a gravitational body and frame dragging are described as two different effects. TWO KEY effects, distinct, not ONE effect where spin causes or contributes to gravity as you claim.

I don't really care about your ignorant blather, but you are clearly not even able to comprehend the very articles you cite in favour of your mimbojimbo nincompoopery.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#109817 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Then tell us dodger, if not pull, what? Is it space magic? Lol
No, it's called attraction. Do you ever read anything that you don't type? Anything?
Psychology

United States

#109818 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. And this is not a case for "spin gravity". It is called "frame dragging" (or the LenseĀ–Thirring effect). It is not an effect of spin but is what happens to space as a massive object spins. This neither increases nor decreases the amount of gravity.
Geodetic Effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodetic_effect
Frame Dragging:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging
Actually, this might be clearer than Wikipedia:
http://www.phy.duke.edu/~kolena/framedrag.htm...
Tell us about frame dragging dodger,ale it precise and sum it up in 100 words or less.
Psychology

United States

#109819 Nov 28, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You will note in you article's words that warping of space time around a gravitational body and frame dragging are described as two different effects. TWO KEY effects, distinct, not ONE effect where spin causes or contributes to gravity as you claim.
I don't really care about your ignorant blather, but you are clearly not even able to comprehend the very articles you cite in favour of your mimbojimbo nincompoopery.
Well then help us here puffer,-- we'll take this how you want it.

Splain frame dragging, seeins how you claim to understand.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109820 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell us about frame dragging dodger,ale it precise and sum it up in 100 words or less.

1. What would you like to know about frame dragging?

2. Why can't you look it up yourself?

Here is a picture. Maybe that will be more clear.

http://einstein.stanford.edu/Library/images/s...
Psychology

United States

#109821 Nov 28, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's called attraction. Do you ever read anything that you don't type? Anything?
Then by all means, do tell us what it means, if not a push or pull. ;)

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109822 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then help us here puffer,-- we'll take this how you want it.
Splain frame dragging, seeins how you claim to understand.

Well to start off with there is gravity. So imagine you are looking at a transparent beech ball and imagine it is the earth (with mass) and you are a dot on the surface. Now, which direction are you going to be pulled? It will be (on average) toward the center of the ball, correct?

Now imagine you are at the center of the beech ball globe; which way will gravity pull you? Well, it will pull you in all directions equally, correct? So the net effect is no gravity. Are you with me so far?

You can do the same thought experiment and imagine you are 2/3's of the way from the surface to the middle of the beech ball. What is the net effect of gravity there? Well, gravity will be pulling in all directions but the gravity in the direction of the center is going to still be greater and you will be pulled in that direction, BUT with less force than if you are standing on the surface.

Now, one more mental experiment to try. Imaging that you are a million miles away from the earth out in space (over 4 times the distance to the moon). Is the gravitational force affecting you going to be less, more or the same as if you were standing on earth. Of course it will be less, correct? Gravity (just like electromagnetic energy) decreases as a function of the square of the distance (e.g. if you double the distance the force is 1/4 as strong).

So..... the gravitational field is the same strength at the center of the earth, it is simply acting in all directions and not unidirectionally as on the surface.

If you are with me so far I can move on to how gravity and rotation causes frame dragging in Relativity.
Psychology

United States

#109823 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
1. What would you like to know about frame dragging?
2. Why can't you look it up yourself?
Here is a picture. Maybe that will be more clear.
http://einstein.stanford.edu/Library/images/s...
Hey, you're the one ignoring the rest of the article in favor of frame dragging aNd geodetic effect, as if you know it all, so since you claim to teach, then you should be able to Splain these things in easy terms for us nobody's. Big smile,

Dodger
Psychology

United States

#109824 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Well to start off with there is gravity. So imagine you are looking at a transparent beech ball and imagine it is the earth (with mass) and you are a dot on the surface. Now, which direction are you going to be pulled? It will be (on average) toward the center of the ball, correct?
Now imagine you are at the center of the beech ball globe; which way will gravity pull you? Well, it will pull you in all directions equally, correct? So the net effect is no gravity. Are you with me so far?
You can do the same thought experiment and imagine you are 2/3's of the way from the surface to the middle of the beech ball. What is the net effect of gravity there? Well, gravity will be pulling in all directions but the gravity in the direction of the center is going to still be greater and you will be pulled in that direction, BUT with less force than if you are standing on the surface.
Now, one more mental experiment to try. Imaging that you are a million miles away from the earth out in space (over 4 times the distance to the moon). Is the gravitational force affecting you going to be less, more or the same as if you were standing on earth. Of course it will be less, correct? Gravity (just like electromagnetic energy) decreases as a function of the square of the distance (e.g. if you double the distance the force is 1/4 as strong).
So..... the gravitational field is the same strength at the center of the earth, it is simply acting in all directions and not unidirectionally as on the surface.
If you are with me so far I can move on to how gravity and rotation causes frame dragging in Relativity.
Are you daffy dodger? None of the above speaks to frame dragging.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#109825 Nov 28, 2012
Can I just say, to Diarrhea Dogen and Psycho-Billy - kudos on keeping it civil and persevering.

Physics never my strong point - so at least I am getting some free info
Psychology

United States

#109826 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Well to start off with there is gravity. So imagine you are looking at a transparent beech ball and imagine it is the earth (with mass) and you are a dot on the surface. Now, which direction are you going to be pulled? It will be (on average) toward the center of the ball, correct?
Now imagine you are at the center of the beech ball globe; which way will gravity pull you? Well, it will pull you in all directions equally, correct? So the net effect is no gravity. Are you with me so far?
You can do the same thought experiment and imagine you are 2/3's of the way from the surface to the middle of the beech ball. What is the net effect of gravity there? Well, gravity will be pulling in all directions but the gravity in the direction of the center is going to still be greater and you will be pulled in that direction, BUT with less force than if you are standing on the surface.
Now, one more mental experiment to try. Imaging that you are a million miles away from the earth out in space (over 4 times the distance to the moon). Is the gravitational force affecting you going to be less, more or the same as if you were standing on earth. Of course it will be less, correct? Gravity (just like electromagnetic energy) decreases as a function of the square of the distance (e.g. if you double the distance the force is 1/4 as strong).
So..... the gravitational field is the same strength at the center of the earth, it is simply acting in all directions and not unidirectionally as on the surface.
If you are with me so far I can move on to how gravity and rotation causes frame dragging in Relativity.
None of the above is about frame dragging,

Dodger

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109827 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, you're the one ignoring the rest of the article in favor of frame dragging aNd geodetic effect, as if you know it all, so since you claim to teach, then you should be able to Splain these things in easy terms for us nobody's. Big smile,
Dodger

Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the article:
NASA's Gravity Probe B (GP-B) mission has confirmed two key predictions derived from Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which the spacecraft was designed to test. The experiment, launched in 2004, used four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure the hypothesized geodetic effect, the warping of space and time around a gravitational body, and frame-dragging, the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates. GP-B determined both effects with unprecedented precision by pointing at a single star, IM Pegasi, while in a polar orbit around Earth.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/

Frame Dragging is, per you own quote, "the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates".
Psychology

United States

#109828 Nov 28, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You will note in you article's words that warping of space time around a gravitational body and frame dragging are described as two different effects. TWO KEY effects, distinct, not ONE effect where spin causes or contributes to gravity as you claim.
I don't really care about your ignorant blather, but you are clearly not even able to comprehend the very articles you cite in favour of your mimbojimbo nincompoopery.

So
So tell us of frame dragging, since you want to ignore the rest of the article puffer dude.
Psychology

United States

#109829 Nov 28, 2012
I am like a pit bull, you cannot confuse or BS me. Now tell us of frame dragging since you both claim to know so much, while you ignore and pretend not to understand the entire rest of the article,

Chimney and dodger
Psychology

United States

#109830 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the article:
NASA's Gravity Probe B (GP-B) mission has confirmed two key predictions derived from Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which the spacecraft was designed to test. The experiment, launched in 2004, used four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure the hypothesized geodetic effect, the warping of space and time around a gravitational body, and frame-dragging, the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates. GP-B determined both effects with unprecedented precision by pointing at a single star, IM Pegasi, while in a polar orbit around Earth.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/
Frame Dragging is, per you own quote, "the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates".
So that's how you Splain frame dragging?
Psychology

United States

#109831 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the article:
NASA's Gravity Probe B (GP-B) mission has confirmed two key predictions derived from Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which the spacecraft was designed to test. The experiment, launched in 2004, used four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure the hypothesized geodetic effect, the warping of space and time around a gravitational body, and frame-dragging, the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates. GP-B determined both effects with unprecedented precision by pointing at a single star, IM Pegasi, while in a polar orbit around Earth.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/
Frame Dragging is, per you own quote, "the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates".
So you're going to blame the whole frame dragging on me. Lmao--- dodger I'm so happy the clique admires you 2 so much, that they even emulate you 2. Funny
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#109832 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
I am like a pit bull, you cannot confuse or BS me.
Nope. We can't confuse someone who is already hopelessly confused.(shrug)
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#109833 Nov 28, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
THERE ARE A DOZEN CREATIONIST "JOURNALS" IN EXISTENCE?!?!?!?
"There's a sucker born every minute"
credited to P. T. Barnum
Haven't you ever heard of ISCID???

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109834 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
I am like a pit bull, you cannot confuse or BS me. Now tell us of frame dragging since you both claim to know so much, while you ignore and pretend not to understand the entire rest of the article,
Chimney and dodger

Since you have not commented on my mental gravity experiment I will assume you have read it and agree. You would have had a conniption if you didn't so....

I am willing to seriously try to explain frame dragging to you if you are serious about wanting to understand it.

I will keep it jargon free, no cut and paste and will not dumb it down.

Agreed?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#109835 Nov 28, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
So that's how you Splain frame dragging?

No, that is how the article DEFINES frame dragging.

"the amount a spinning object pulls space and time with it as it rotates".

And it even has the word "pull" that you like so much.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 min The Northener 52,191
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 21 min IB DaMann 492
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 24 min replaytime 218,825
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 28 min Aura Mytha 1,203
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 49 min scientia potentia... 24,885
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 55 min scientia potentia... 157,753
Can the universe be God's brain? (Jun '07) Jan 19 scientia potentia... 98
More from around the web