/ARISTO/

>>8718785
>or, in the case of natural motion, the object's weight
the object's weight is a force

You are in good company friend. People thought everythng aristotle said was correct for almost 2000 years, these dead souls will surely provide you with the discourse you desire.

>>8718811
Maybe he was right? What quantity has a moving object related to one that is still? Velocity and motion yes, but what really is are those?

>>8718820
Displacement, or change. According to Aristotle, a piece of paper and a crumbled piece of paper should fall at the same velocity, but this is not true!

>>8718785
Is this bait? I remember seeing this a couple of weeks ago, but....are you being serious?

>>8718820
Right about what? Everything? I think you have too much faith in the ancient dead, they have just as much an ability to be wrong, often even moreso.

>>8718826
What really makes those displacements? Take a still picture of those objects. Why the other moves and other stays still at the next frame?

>>8718838
What is a still picture? Define being still.

Think about photons. They just move constant speed, never stopping. Even when scattered, they don't lose speed. They are like hi describes them, moving fast, filling spaces.

>>8718838
The quantity related to position is actually partly qualitative because it depends on a fixed point in space as a reference. Once this point is established as zero or any other number, metrics are used to measure an objects change of position using mathematics.

>>8718846
Their registered positions r at a known time t, i.e r(t)

>>8718850
But WHY the other particle moves?

>>8718857
Are you asking why particles would fill the void? I would not know. I don't know if they even do fill the void without an impetus.

>>8718853
Positions as measured from where? What is time? Does it matter how we measure it?

>ancient greeks

DUDE
CIRCLES AND STRAGHT LINES
LMAO

Also the guy said that the speed at which objects fall is proportional to their mass which I don't know how anyone ever believed.

>>8718985
It's a pretty common sense assumption. Heavy shit falls faster than light shit. Children instinctively believe this until they are educated otherwise

>>8718900
> What is time?
pic related
>>8718846
A still picture would be the subspace of the Universe containing simultaneous events

File: Time.png (60KB, 722x189px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 722x189px

>>8719059
image fell off

>>8719014
>Children instinctively believe this until they are educated otherwise

I mean sure, and if you never looked closely at it I'm sure it would be the first assumption I'd make as well.

However, there undoubtedly have been clever people and scientists around for a long time, and it's quite clear if you drop something like a pebble and a fist-sized rock from your hand that the times they take to fall down are not different by the same factor that their masses are.

>>8719065
If it really were so clear, it wouldn't have taken over a thousand years, nearly two thousand, for people to finally debunk Aristotle's lamebrained physics. It seems silly in hindsight, but don't you think it's odd that it took so long for people to figure things out? Clearly it wasn't so obvious. I mean, they don't have stopwatches. They didn't have the mindset that leads people to do repeated, controlled experiments anyways, because 'science' as a philosophy wasn't firmly established, and even if they could do experiments, communication was difficult due to lack of printing press.

>>8719085
>isn't it strange how ancient powers used to horde and filter information to their benefit?

>>8719085
>Clearly it wasn't so obvious
>they don't have stopwatches

But you don't even need stopwatches to see that. You can drop two rocks with a weight ratio of 1:10 (you don't even need to measure this precisely) and their fall times are just not different by a factor anywhere near 10. I wonder if I'm misunderstanding something about Aristotelian physics (quite possible, I never looked much into it) or did they have some way to explain around this?

Even without a mindset for repeated experiment or a developed scientific method, surely such an observation must have been made time and again?

File: hammerfeather_06.jpg (107KB, 702x708px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 702x708px

>>8718785
Fuck you Aristotle. Go eat a bag of dicks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C5_dOEyAfk

File: c6d3824406493d2dc0ac7c7f949448b9_seven-point-heptagram-star-clipart-7-pointed-star_1024-993.gif (35KB, 1024x993px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1024x993px

>>8718785
>Aristotelian physics
>not Chaos Physicks
fucking brainlet tier wisdom

>>8719115
Obviously rocks fall at the same rate because rocks are composed of the same substance.
If you compare a rock to a feather, you will notice that they will fall at very different rates, because they are made of dissimilar substances.

File: 1449530832845.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

So this is /sci/'s version of flat earthers.

File: 1487230050531.png (298KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 480x480px

>>8719477
>tfw can't inscribe a heptagon in a circle with a compass

>>8719481
Drop them in vacuum.

>>8720805
Vacuums cannot exist because particles rush in to fill voids. If you had a total void (a vacuum), particles would rush in at an infinite speed, thus with an infinity energy.

File: 1476701925359.jpg (17KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x250px

>>8718785
>formalism
>uncertainty

I know it's a troll pic, but modern science uses rational and empirical methods while ancient greeks did not have any and were simply looking at stuff without touching it.

>>8720998
unless you have particles that are bound in place, like say a solid, and evacuate the majority of the air through some method of work like a pump.

File: fockoff.png (354KB, 774x718px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 774x718px

>>8720998
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frZ9dN_ATew