You can support me on Patreon here: / chenphilosophy I wish my students were as passionate as Terrence Howard. For anyone out there who's struggling, do not give up. Every day is an opportunity to become more educated.
A person truly passionate about any aspect of science and mathematics would never find a earnest and thorough peer review as an insult. It is empowering, in any journey of discovery, to be proven wrong, as it stops one from straying further away from the truth. The frontier of science has never been a string of successes, but rather a collection of mistakes, errors, and misconceptions that gradually guides us towards true breakthrough. One can understandably be frustrated by the fact that one's theory is proven wrong, but should never be insulted by an earnest and studious review that is there to guide one onto the right path.
While I wholeheartedly agree with this, I think if we were to understand Howard's perspective, he feels as though Tyson is dismissing him the same way others with seemingly brilliant ideas were dismissed: which is upon the basis that the previously existing scientific models are infallible. Howard might be wrong according to physics, but there is a strange beauty in how passionate he is about what he clearly thinks is sound argumentation.
I can't believe this was your takeaway from watching NDT's response to Terrance Howard... People with mental illness can be very passionate. What do you think NDT should have said instead? His statement about the Dunning-Kruger effect explains this whole situation perfectly, it's not at all dissimilar from how the flat earther movement began.
People without a “mental illness” can be very passionate as well. Great argument, doctor. Guy watches a video and they say Dunning-Kruger effect and now he thinks he knows everything. “Ohhh, fancy terminology.” Talk about ironic.
@@Akadehmix the guy that made this video already said what you said, so I was providing an alternative, you providing the opposite to my alternative is just redundant because that was already the point of the original poster.
I've also worked for a behavioral health provider for over 8 years so I think I know a little about the topic. & it's funny you mention fancy terminology when that is all that Terrance Howard spouted off with during his appearance on JRE. Just so you know, real wave conjugations from the flower of life is not a thing. Phase conjugations of a wave have to do w/ optics, lasers, & holograms. & what scientists were there in 8,000 BCE that were so stumped by these real wave conjugations?
Physics is not opinion. It is not a faith. Peer review in science is the gateway to truth. Having people in your peer group break down your theories and find its faults is what you would want. If you are an actual truth seeker. If you just want somebody to pat you on the back and tell you how brilliant you are, then present your theories to your “group“. Where everyone is supportive and feelings are more important than facts.
The access you mentioned most people don't have, Terrence did have (and he's an actor). Dr Neil took his time and thoroughly went through Terrence's paper and gave an honest, objective peer review. It's good to be passionate, but it's more important to be humble especially when peer reviewed by great minds in the field. To take a step back and process the feedback and see where you've erred and correct yourself accordingly. If Terrence believes he's right, he doesn't need anyone's approval. There're other people that think like him. But the fact that Dr Neil's disapproval (or honest review) hurt him tells us that Terrence is prideful and doesn't like genuine correction. Dr Neil is not the only one that critiqued his work. There are videos of other scientists doing the same thing and coming to the same conclusion as Dr Neil.
You’re right. He’s not good at taking constructive criticism. I wasn’t for a long time and still am not. I try to work on it all the time. It’s not something that comes naturally to most people. I think a lot of people who’d be in this position would react similar in that regard. Hence the op admitting to it. If you’re this enlightened, that’s great for you, or maybe you’re not being honest with yourself. Maybe you don’t have enough ideas to hear them be criticized and in turn experience what it’s like.
I think the arrogance in which Terrence made his claims is a huge factor here. He seemed more interested in being perceived a genius than in finding truth. He made those claims as though people who came before him were stupid and that he was somehow brilliant.
Passion is no substitute for doing the necessary work, which Howard has not done and clearly has no intention to do. In this era of social-media narcissism, passion is for many a lazy workaround for doing the hard, time-consuming, essential stuff. Avoiding the work while claiming the establishment doesn't understand and is just trying to keep you down is the worst kind of delusional bullshit, and Howard shouldn't be commended for his empty, self-congratulatory passion. Tyson did Howard a huge solid that he didn't merit. And instead of learning something, Howard went on Joe Rogan and cried about it, all the while misrepresenting what Tyson said and spewing a fountain of nonsense to a host and audience who lack the background to assess his claims.
This is one of the most shortsighted takes you could have given. "Don't give up". Sometimes nonsense needs to be put down. He's lucky Tyson read more than 1 page of that nonsense let alone give him a critique and peer review for a guy who is obviously off of his rocker.
I am not sure why are you throwing shade at NDT? He was nothing but supportive. He spent a lot of time reviewing every single part and done the best to comment each part as objectively as possible... exactly how you said most of the people from academia wouldn't. So he deserves nothing but respect. I agree though, that peer reviews can be burtal and getting your ego hurt like this is not fun, at all. But science is science. There should be no place for ego. But I do get your message Jason, I get what you are trying to say. It is a positive one... I just don't like you threw NDT under the buss in the process
Exactly. This guy has no idea what he's talking about. The fact he mentions that "you need to get in a special club" to be peer reviewed makes me cringe. I mean.... maybe Terry with all his acting money can afford to submit, I dunno maybe a scientific fkin paper to one of the major scientific journals because that's how you get peer reviewed? I mean he could even do one of the free ones. Terry doesn't have a scientific paper, just a book full of ramblings with no experimentation, no explanations of his theories and no way to reproduce his claims. We shouldn't be giving credibility to a man who is so ignorant he doesn't realise "silicone" isn't an element on the periodic table.
@@charlehpock I think you missed the point. Terrence got the attention of NDT because they were on a friendly basis. Most of us don't have a relationship that will get a scientist to take a serious look at a 36 page paper. But grad students are attached at the hip to respected scientists. They have access.
@@isaacclark9825 no? I didn't miss the point, you missed the point. NDT looked at the guys stuff because he was a friend and he was curious. If Terry wanted to be taken seriously he would have submitted a scientific paper to a journal. Having a friend who's a scientist means you can ask a friend to look at your ideas, it doesn't mean it's the correct route to getting any serious body of scientific work peer reviewed. If you submit a paper to the right place, it will get the attention it needs. Don't pretend to know about how stuff works in a field you don't work in.
Bro it’s literally the critique he wanted. He sent it to one of the top minds on this planet and asked for feedback…you think NDT is going to sugar coat things? Come on dude. If he truly believes that NDT is wrong about his thesis, then he needs to publish it in the journals, and let the world provide the feedback.. What’s the issue with peer reviews? They literally tell you what’s wrong with your statements, and gives you the ammo for further research and note you can provide “proof” that you are correct and their feedback is incorrect…
Yea, but you can't claim "reinvented science" And math that we know now was wrong without peer review. But when they reviewed it and gave counter to your point, you can't say that is an insults.
That’s what I’m saying. Scientists should be open to critique from other smart people. And most, if not all scientist that I personally know love when people critique their work and question it because it gives them a deeper insight. The fact that he took such a mild peer review from Neil deGrasse Tyson as an insult or an attack is so silly. Would he have preferred Neil to lie and act as if everything he said was true. Maybe. I personally don’t believe that this guy actually wants to prove anything. I think that he likes the idea of having secret knowledge that everyone else doesn’t have. While his followers like the idea of the world not being what we thought it was. for him I don’t think this is actually about science. I think it’s more about his outlandish ideas and he just wants people to accept them without question. Feels like a cult more than a good faith attempt at scientific discovery.
Both things can be true. Terrance Howard can have an interest in science but also that interest can be supersede or overshadowed by his desire to be seen as an intellectual juggernaut. I listened to this podcast even though I’m not normally a Joe Rogan fan. I didn’t find anything he said to indicate any rigorous understanding of the topic. I want my time back
Because he has zero understanding and just lies - he's a bullshitter. In that podcast he claims to understand all of these things and have a level of insight into the workings of the universe that no-one else has, plus also claims many special powers/abilities * Claims he can remember being in the womb * Claims to have synthesesia (says this in another interview, I'll come back to why this is important) * Claims he has invented revolutionary technology * Claims 97 patents that prove his intellect and understanding * Claims he could have destroyed all of mankind with what he has found but decided not to All of these are the ramblings of a delusional narcissistic madman. Whilst I can't disprove he can remember being in the womb or that he has sythesesia, I can look at the other claims, and a lot of red flags exist in the stuff he says there. Everything he speaks about is wishy washy with inaccurate terminology and a lack of explanation of his ideas. He says that Jupiter will birth a planet with no explanation of how or why - during not one single second of the podcast did he go into any detail behind his claims. The reason for this is that there IS no detail, these are just wishy washy surface level insights that you might get whilst smoking a shitload of weed with your friends. "oh what if planets shit out other planets? wow...." - ok great, now go do some research and find a mechanism/examples to back your claims? Oh you can't? Go on Joe Rogan instead and trash other scientists that, with the utmost respect, dismantled your surface level shit with actual science.
The famous “two things can be true” quote that everyone on social media likes to spew like it’s intellectually divine. Thanks for pointing out the obvious before you made your statement.
@@Akadehmix wow the famous “the famous” rebuttal. Thank for saying absolutely nothing like you’re a 9th grade teacher correcting an English assignment.
I feel like if you can't handle rejection there are certain fields that you shouldn't be in. One would be teaching because kids are brutal. Another would be science because, well, it's too important for you to be thin-skinned and not be able to take facts. How can you be in a facts-based field but then be mad about facts. I don't get it.
People want to be special and important, and they want to be part of a community. This is the root cause of conspiracy theorists and virtually all human behavior on some level. The mediator is knowledge and intelligence; this is what separates the nut cases from the rest of us. Bottom line, humanity is doomed.
I'd argue it's critical thinking and self awareness that separates delusional nutjobs from others. Intelligence is a spectrum and knowledge is interpreted.
Any scientist that gets this upset over another scientist critiquing his work doesn’t truly want to learn. He wants to have secret knowledge that no one else has and he wants to be known as a misunderstood genius that was ignored in his time. he enjoy spouting off nonsense instead of actually trying to figure out any of this stuff. I believe that he likes math science and physics because he did choose to go into these fields of study. But that doesn’t mean he’s correct on any of what he says or that he’s even interested in finding out the truth.
Bro he has always been wrong since the beginning there is no way you can make yourself fly and be the hulk bro. Stop dreaming in looney tunes already, hit reality nig
Terrance is not interested in humbling himself, he thinks he knows more than Neil… most graduate students aren’t suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect… I mean it’d be really hard to pass your classes if you erroneously think you know more than your professors…
and if you're not from academia you may not have the basis to understand the basics. the pursuit of knowledge is to be encouraged. however, Howard seems to lack the basic knowledge to build upon a theory of anything. he needs to go back to school to have the guidance of those wiser so that he may expound upon his drive to learn more. self learning from whatever source is great but has the propensity to allow the learner to go off on illegitimate tangents that are misguided.
Exactly, he’s not interested in knowledge. He’s onky interested in the ego trip of being seen as a genius without having to do all that pesky hard work. Everybody wants to be a nerd until it’s time to do nerd shit.
Terrence Howard should consider himself lucky that Neil deGrasse Tyson took him seriously to respond. I’m not rude to the homeless person yelling nonsense, but I don’t stop to listen to him either. Howard talks a lot of nonsense, sprinkled with out of context data, and some emotionally uplifting stuff to bore you into thinking his some type of genius. This is an old technique cults use Since Hollywood got tired of Howard playing the same weepy role in every movie, this is either a marketing ploy to revive his career, or he is completely insane. Or both.
So if I write a 45 page long paper on the quantum field of verbs and their relation to the gold pot at the end of rainbows... and my "peers" rejected it as the ramblings of a lunatic... I should not be dicouraged to keep sending papers with my other great ideas to scientists?
He’s clearly interested in his own God-like persona. For the years that Howard supposedly “studied”, he came to the conclusion that 1x1=2. You’re gonna defend that huh? “Peer reviews are brutal” then you recommend that people should “bounce their ideas off professors”? That’s the same thing! No WONDER most of your students don’t listen to you in class… Thanks for the wise words, professor!
you have to be the nicest person ever to see him as a knowledge hungry pupil, instead of a narcissistic rich actor who thinks he broke the laws of the universe with a ridiculous proposal.
Imagine there are multi verses and one such universe uses Terrence science and another uses Neil science and another uses Eric science. I wonder how each of these worlds would look like ..
Imagine an alien came to earth and Terrence explains his unified theory to the alien and 1 x 1 = 2 Then Eric explains God and power of prayer to the alien. Then Neil explains 1 x 1 = 1 If the alien is superior logic and reasoning, who would make most sense?
For me, this interview was just sad. I blame that entirely on Joe Rogan. At times you can tell that he is just humoring Terrance without giving him any pushback. He asks a few appropriate questions but does not follow up. But then Terrance compliments him on taking a bold stand as an anti-vaxxer, and Joe eats up the praise as if it were candy. I don't watch Joe Rogan, but if what I saw here is an example of what goes on with his show, I am not missing much.
For some of your viewers. a + a = 2a Why? You are adding two a. If you have an apple and take another apple, you have two apples. Now a lot of you are saying if a+a=2a, then a×a must be 2a. Addition and multiplication are not the same. Let me give you an example. 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 7 Now why do you think 1×7 is 7? Its because you're adding 1 seven times. That's what multiplication is. 1 × 1 is 1 because you're adding 1 one time. Not twice. How do you people fail basic fundamental mathematics is beyond me. Multiplication came to streamline the process of adding. It was invented to make counting large livestocks easier. Multiplication is Addition in a fancy hat.
Dude, I apprrciate your positivity but does Terrance Howard seem to be the type of person who is trying to learn a subject or is he basically making stuff up whole cloth?
Anyone who thinks they can rewrite the periodic table needs a thorazine dessert. He may have a passion for science but my 8 yr old nephew knows more about science then he does. The sad thing is some people buy into it and thats dangerous.
Nah... Howard doesnt really care about physics. He cares about clout. He literally believes all calculators have been programmed by "them". His theory is not mathematical or scientific. It is simply conspiracy. He may thinks physics is cool, like many lay people do, i know I do, but he just dismisses his challengers. He doesn't try to counter with scholarly pursuit. He throws around accusations of conspiracy and that's a bout it.
He needs to learn to take criticism better. Science is all about putting your ideas out there and having people tear them apart. Without that process, we would end up with crazy people like Terrence Howard telling everybody that gravity isn’t real that the periodic table is fundamentally flawed, and that math isn’t what the entirety of science has said it is. I understand that he has some big ideas and like Neil deGrasse Tyson said he’s happy to see someone passionate. if you watch Neil’s video, he was critical of the but for a scientist I thought he was very kind. What was he supposed to do pretend like his math was right even though it was wrong he’s a scientist. He’s not gonna do that. If he really cared about the truth, he would stop trying to prove his crazy theory is right and try to find the truth instead. No one including him has been able to give a good explanation on how math is broken and how gravity doesn’t exist. For him to expect any serious scientist to take him completely serious is crazy. This is an actor that is clearly a little crazy and doesn’t really know what he’s talking about. I think he genuinely believes the stuff that he saying, but the fact that he can’t take any criticism of his work is going to lead him to making the same mistakes over and over again. he’s never going to discover anything. Doesn’t seem to understand the scientific method.
I agree with every thing you said. I wrote this as a response: I think all of us were hoping in the Hollywood-esque fable to be true: that a well established actor moonlights as a mathematician and discovers that his prodigious powers of insight eclipse his acting ability. He learns that he must take on the ‘establishment” and upend intellectual history by providing a theorem that defies all previous lemmas (mathematics, informal logic and argument mapping, a lemma is a generally minor, proven proposition which is used as a stepping stone to a larger result. For that reason, it is also known as a "helping theorem" or an "auxiliary theorem Wikipedia). I can see the camera zoom into the well-chiseled actor’s face whose penetrating green eyes sparkle like emeralds against perfectly pecan tanned skin. Let’s add he’s dressed in a tight t-shirt so we can see underlines of muscles beneath and the occasional peek of a tattoos for the sake of looking anti-establishment. He takes a deep breath in and scans the room of scholars, who in comportment are all in suits and look dour and woefully un-cute. As he pans the room, he gently picks up the chalk and begins to write equations that evade common understandings of math, but clearly due to their erudition furrows the brows of those in the audience. They begin to mumble and talk amongst themselves in amazement. Suddenly a slow clap from the back rises to thunderous applause. An ovation. Tears gently meander down our chiseled actor’s face as he realizes he has done it. Yes, I confess, I wanted that too and then I realized, even as an academic, that I fell for a trope that has impacted so many aspects of our society. We like superheros to come from improbable circumstances as to give moral credence to their struggle and lift the underdog to their rightful place. I wanted that superhero to arise in academe. Peer review is stultifying and yet it is necessary. My frustrations of the process match that of many of my colleagues about the encroachment of academic capitalism and it’s intractable demands to compress time to get our thinking out quickly--only to hurry up and wait. What Dr. Tyson’s gracious peer review and even more gracious video rebuttal reveals are some unfortunate aspects about the world of academe and the perceptions of academia. Knowledge creation takes time. Like, a lot of time. So much so, that our ongoing joke as intellectuals and scholars is we move glacially. Yeah, (slow calp). This pensiveness, the need to redo and rethink ideas to the point of running on a recursive treadmill is because we are all deeply frightened of the Dunning-Krueger Phantom. It is the thing that frightens us in night sweats of anxiety asking ourselves if we got it right? Did we, God forbid, forget something? Check and recheck. Time is both the superhero and the antihero here. It’s not sexy. It does not wear a cape and often creeps in robbing the body of youthful vigor as the ideas capriciously eek themselves out on the page. There is merit in doing things slowly and there is pain in doing it the right way. Finding truths takes time, respect, and a humbleness to accept when you’re incorrect. Perhaps this very public exchange between Mr. Howard and Dr. Tyson provides the opportunity for us as scholars to teach the public why in an increasing environment where universities are being discounted, derided and disrespected as foppish enclaves of privilege, that they are actually great places. Knowledge building takes time and universities are an honorable place to do the work of scholarship. There is merit to creating knowledge that has no immediate utility for corporations or business. But even more importantly, I think Dr. Tyson’s gracious talk (did I say gracious again? I really mean that) admonishes us to do is to not give up on the faith of institutions. Universities are powerful places to do learning because there are some cardinal rules that have worked for the course of over a millennia all over this beautiful planet. Whether in Timbuktu, Bologna, Oxford or Shanghai, despite cultures, religions and beliefs, scholarship is a community of those who dare to question and seek the truth. Peer review is a deeply important instrumentality of finding the truth. It requires speaking civilly and accepting that a good rebuttal does not mean personal hate, it simply means I respect you enough to tell you WHY I do not agree with you... Peer review is our superpower and like any Marvel character whose been tested, it’s power works well most of the time; not all of the time. And like those stories, our greatest strength is often our greatest weakness. But I digress… For those reasons alone, Mr. Howard should know that most of us would consider it a profound honor to have Dr. Tyson personally review a paper and “tear it apart”. Ego says he is a rock star of sorts, humanity says that he is simply a great lover of wisdom: a true philosopher of the stars. For this reason, I would encourage Mr. Howard to take his personal umbrage towards enrolling into some classes that can make his ruminations have power, insight and truth. Shameless plug: Are you interested in coming to the University of Illinois? We would love to have you. You are clearly bright and like most people of inquiring minds, living some time amongst the fields of corn and soy beans with proximity to Chicago, in a world-class internationally recognized community of scholars could be just the commitment you need at this time in your life to live the life of the mind for a spell. I will warn you though, this shit is humbling, so be ready to do good suffering. In the spirit of scholastic tradition, all of us; students, faculty, and researchers, prostrate ourselves to something greater than our own ideas. We acknowledge that though oftentimes genius is touted to be an individual exploit, it is truly a collective cognitive endeavor which allow us to build a better understanding of existence. So come join us, Mr. Howard. The door is open. In the interim, Dr. Tyson, I wish I had a paper for you to review. Mad respect man. Mad. I think this is an opportunity for us to make what we do approachable to the public. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Criticize Terrence all you want. Math and physics are not the same. He may be wrong mathematically but you cannot dismiss him if he provides experimental proof like Einstein did. The current math fails at singularities and infinity is not typically observed in nature. Someone has to fix it at some point.
Most of these blow hearts like Tyson don’t know jack. He - is and never will be a visionary . Like most . Do we believe all of Howard ideas ? Of course not. Is he wrong on everything- probably not . Yet he dares to challenge .
Terrence should be questioning his abilities because they are inadequate to say the least. I don't care about your passion I care about accuracy. As a matter of fact that's one of the big problems today people are passionate about being wrong and we let them. It has now become a thing ,, you can't make me believe the right answer I'll be wrong and there's nothing you can do about it! Proudly stupid is no way to go through life son. lol
Actors lie for pay. Yes they are entertaining but that's where it ends for me. I cannot believe anyone who gets paid for lying. Once you make the decision to lie for a living I can't trust you. Entertainment purposes only.
Most annoying presumption that non-scientists constantly use. Scientific theories are not theories - they are essentially fact, or the closest we can get to fact at this particular time. Terry has ideas. Scientific theories are ideas that have been rigorously tested through repeated experimentation over history. Take Einsteins theory of general relativity - claims that it made before experimentation have been tested now that we have the means to test them and it STILL HOLDS UP. Please, educate yourself and stop throwing credibility to Terrys nonsense. He got torn apart by NDT in a scientific way - i.e. stating facts, using evidence/studies etc to back up his claims. Something that Terry fails to do. Terry is just making wild claims with no evidence, maths or science to back it up. Here's a simple piece of research you can do - Google "scientific theory". Do this every time you feel like posting nonsense on the internet and you'll look less silly.
No, theory’s are based off known facts. Unfortunately in modern speak its another word for “i have a baseless idea” and its called a theory. For example, if i run this red light theres a good chance im going to be in an accident. Fact 1) im supposed to stop at a red light. Fact 2) traffic is moving at speed at the intersection. Theory) based on these 2 facts theres an elevated chance of collision and furthermore death. An idea) if i run this red light rainbows will appear out of the butts of the pedestrians waiting to cross the road. No facts, just an idea. Get it?
Neil never debunked anything he just used the Dunning Kruger effect to try and convince everyone that Terrence is experiencing the dunning Kruger effect..he never gives a rebuttal to any of Howard’s claims, NDT simply says, that’s cute, you’re wrong, without explanation. He does occasionally say he doesn’t understand Howard’s work, so therefore he uses Dunning Kruger from a position of power to convince himself he’s correct because he’s considered an ‘expert’. Still waiting for any kind of explanation of how Terrance’s theories are incorrect. Cuz y’all don’t have them.
TH said NG invited him on his show and TH said I would love to but I want to tell you what I am going to discuss. Rather than inviting him on the show like he said, He redlined what TH sent him and then did not bring him on his show.
Are you serious? He's not being shunned because he's an actor, he's being shunned because, if you actually read his book or listen to anything he says, you'd see that it's just nonsensical ramblings with no evidence, maths or science to back it. It pisses me off that you can listen to a man say "I was going to destroyed mankind with what I've invented" and then take anything else that comes out of his mouth seriously. And yes, he did say this, he actually said this very thing in the podcast. Did you just gloss over it? It reminds me of when you see preteens that are finally allowed out on their own - you see them sat in a fast food restaurant all talking bullshit to each other to try to one-up the previous person "my dad killed 6 people with a pen so now he's in prison, but he escaped", "well my dad is working for SpaceX and he's going to mars next week".
I couldn’t agree more. I’m surprised how similarly we understood Terrance and Neil. Terrance is very passionate and obviously very interested in what he’s studying. Hearing you’re wrong about something you’re so passionate about isn’t easy for anyone to take in. I’ve been in the situation many times. People seem to think this makes him crazy or something. No, maybe he’s just wrong. People overlook things all the time. Or maybe he’s right about some things and didn’t communicate his ideas well enough. Who knows. Either way, I appreciate both Terrance and Neil.
He's both wrong and he didn't communicate his ideas well enough. The reason he didn't communicate his ideas well enough is that they are WRONG. There's no way to communicate those ideas because they don't work because they are WRONG. He's regurgitating ideas other scientists had in the past which were proven to be incorrect, and stating them as fact. At least the regurgitated ideas have some credence, his very own ideas (planet birth) are so incredibly wrong he hasn't got any sort of model to go with them. Who uses Blender to do planetary/field simulation..? Come on now... blender is an animation tool - it approximates physics to do particle simulation, the fact Terry thinks that making Saturn in Blender constitutes some sort of evidence for his theories is a joke. If you know anything about software you'd understand how so many shortcuts are used in game engine/art physics simulations to approximate reality so that these calculations can run quickly without causing processing bottlenecks. To then try to use them to simulate physics for science is just incredibly ignorant.
Terrance Howard is correct: 1 + 1 = 2 I laptop x 1 laptop = 2 laptops 1 x 894 = 894 + 1 = 895 1 man x 1 woman = 2 people The foregoing equations are balance[d] and they obey the laws of physics, which is used to explain our known Universe ( the law of conservation of energy, the law of cause and effect, inter alia) . Regardless if you like it or not, we are in a third dimension of thinking performance. You can participate willingly, or you can be dragged into a higher dimension of thinking, kicking and screaming. Sorry, we have arrived. Stop complaining and let’s get to work to make our world a better place, and stop the depravity of the human beings that are trying to put us and the planet on the extinction list. All praises to the Most High!
Good maths here, on your first line 1 + 1 does in fact equal 2, well done. After that you say that "i laptop x 1 laptop = 2 laptops", I assume the "i" represents the value 2, therefore 2 laptops x 1 laptop = 2 laptops, correct again. The third one, I'm starting to struggle with - 1 x 894 = 894 + 1? I'm not sure 894 does in fact equal 895, but I'm sure I probably mislaid the 1 somewhere, probably my mistake. The last one I think for sure has some errata, 1 man x 1 woman = 2 people...well, not sure I can support this, you've changed units of measure in the middle of the equation. What's the conversion between 1 woman and 1 man? Is it 1 transgender? I'm not sure - can you please clarify? /s
LOL, multiplication is not the same as reproduction. You people are just wrongly using symbols such as multiplication or what numbers 1 or 2 mean. Multiplication is repeated addition. 1 * 2 = 1 + 1 = 2, 1 * 1 = 1. How many 1s fit in the number 2? The answer is two 1s. Therefore, if you only have one 1, you don't get to the number 2
@@afjelidfjssaf brain-dead people on the internet would disagree, 1 apple times 1 Lamborghini is 2 pizzas apparently. The fact anyone is giving Terry any credibility pisses me off. I think we need a reset; I'm not saying genocide is the answer but it's probably better than having a populace that think planets can shit out another planet...
a + a = 2a Why? You are adding two a. If you have an apple and take another apple, you have two apples. Now a lot of you are saying if a+a=2a, then a×a must be 2a. Addition and multiplication have a pretty neat relationship. Let me give you an example. 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 7 Now why do you think 1×7 is 7? It's because you're adding 1 unit seven times. That's what multiplication is. 1 × 1 is 1 because you're adding 1 to itself. 1+1 is you adding 1 with another 1. The notion of 1×1 being 2 fails in a fundamental level. How do you people fail basic fundamental mathematics is beyond me. Multiplication came to streamline the process of adding. It was invented to make counting large livestocks easier. Multiplication is Addition in a fancy hat.
Terrance Howard is correct. He is a brilliant mind, and he deserves the Nobel Prize. If 1 + 1 = 2, then 1 energy unit x 1 energy unit = 2 energy units. The equation is balance per the basis of the laws of physics: law of conservation of energy, and the law of cause and effect. However, the equation 1 x1= 1 is wrong, and a violation of the foregoing laws of physics, inter alia. Neil deGrasse Tyson’s allege rebuttal did not disprove any of Terrance Howard’s correctness. What was the relevance of the math deGrasse showed? DeGrasse just gave a sales pitch on why we should remain at a 2nd dimension thinking performance. He talked about his worship of a peer review. Check out the link below and Dr David Tong will explain to you where peer review has gotten us today on science. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zNVQfWC_evg.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zNVQfWC_evg.html Terrance Howard is correct, and he deserves the Nobel Prize.
The number '2' is made up of two 1s. If you only have the number '1' one time, you don't get 2. You're just ignoring what multiplication and numbers are defined as
