Categories
bronies misogyny rape rapey whaaaaa?

A Brony has some truly horrifying questions about rape

I have no words:

Is Mr. Sookdeo trolling here? Over on Bronysay, where I found this, someone claiming to know him says he was serious, just a bit “confused.” The questions seem sincere to me. Ugh.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

223 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Vindicare:
Look, I get it. I called out the bad physics in your not-funny joke, and that made you feel silly, so you want to insult and embarrass me to make yourself look better. It almost makes me think you’re not interested in learning anything here at all 🙁

And, then there’s the fact that every new question you ask that you think will trip me up just displays more errors.

Take note- when you’re making a pedantic argument based on a dictionary definition, it’s always a good idea to check the dictionary first. For example, from the Oxford English Dictionary:

a. Separate, detached from others, individually distinct. Opposed to continuous.

.
Yes, discrete sort of is a synonym for “quantized”, but it’s also a bit more general. It means “non-continuous”. This is important.

It is the word “quantized” that usually means “there are only certain special values which the measurement can give you”. There is a slight semantic difference between “discrete” and “quantized”- in particular I’d argue that “discrete” does not imply any requirement on how a variable is broken up into disjoint units, only that it is. However, that’s a pretty minor semantic quibble- the words are somewhat interchangeable.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

“And also implying that entropy could ever do anything but increase” — me noting how Vindicare failed

“I “imply” exactly what the second law says. The entropy of the universe can’t decrease.” — Vindicare reading the exact opposite of what I said

For someone who supposedly understands quantum mechanics, you might’ve paid more attention in English. “could ever do anything but” = “cannot not” or “must only” — you failed by implying entropy could not increase, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you didn’t intend to imply entropy could decrease. Also, “implying that entropy could decrease” just felt too silly to say.

Apparently I need to be blunt with the sentient bong hit though.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

@Sharculese:

what slur did i use? cretin originated in french as a slang term for the mentally challenged. but yeah, nobody uses it that way and vindicare’s being his traditional dissembling self trying to turn it back on me.

http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/10/ableist-word-profile-cretin/

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

@QuantumSparkle:

Look, I get it. I called out the bad physics in your not-funny joke, and that made you feel silly, so you want to insult and embarrass me to make yourself look better.

Jesus, the joke was a frickin reference to Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist”, you didn’t get that? So now you know. And ask yourself: Why should I bother to get the physics right?

It is the word “quantized” that usually means “there are only certain special values which the measurement can give you”. There is a slight semantic difference between “discrete” and “quantized”- in particular I’d argue that “discrete” does not imply any requirement on how a variable is broken up into disjoint units, only that it is. However, that’s a pretty minor semantic quibble- the words are somewhat interchangeable.

I don’t care that much about discrete vs. quantized, I want to know why this holds (almost certainly a result of misunderstanding Heisenberg’s uncertainty): “the measurement of position is necessarily discrete because of Heisenberg uncertainty”.

@Argenti Aertheri:

Vindicare reading the exact opposite of what I said

No, I objected to what you said.

Apparently I need to be blunt with the sentient bong hit though.

It’s already quite sad to feel the need to copy Sharculese’s jokes, it’s even sadder to repeat them three times.

Snowy
Snowy
8 years ago

Jesus, the joke was a frickin reference to Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist”, you didn’t get that?

Yeah no, I’m pretty sure everyone “got” your joke. They just didn’t think it was funny and proceeded to make fun of you for getting things wrong when you were trying to be all clever. Do you seriously not get that? Also, this post is like a week old and yet you still can’t let it go. Personally I find that kind of hilarious.

Snowy
Snowy
8 years ago

And Sharculese, unlike you, actually makes funny jokes which is why calling you a sentient bong hit has caught on. Don’t be jealous dear, it’s not a good look for you.

Xtra
Xtra
8 years ago

I don’t remember what brought this thread about but the comments here are the manbooz version of the most interesting man(feminist?) in the world.

QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Ahem, if you mean me… most interesting woman (feminist!) in the world 🙂

I now predict that Vindicare’s tone towards me will be even more nasty because trolls hate ladies.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

@Snowy:

Bart: Don’t you understand??
Milhouse: Yeah… But you say it first.

Ok, all kidding aside, Snowy, I’m sorry, you still don’t get it. Yes, my joke was an (admittedly silly) reference to Schrödinger’s rapist, but look back at the context “First Vindicare fails at thermodynamics […] Any guess for what’s next?” (lauralot89). I hope you understand that my joke was a self-ironic reply to that and so how it’s very weird to correct me.

And why am I still replying to this old thread?
I always thought that the “angry, bitter feminist” was just a nasty stereotype but now that I these “experiences” with people like you. I think it’s just natural to want to sort that out.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

@QuantumSparkle:

I now predict that Vindicare’s tone towards me will be even more nasty because trolls hate ladies.

No, I’m fine with that, for lack of a better word, and it won’t change my tone. You should also remember, that I’m the one who is constantly attacked for no reason.

Snowy
Snowy
8 years ago

Haha yeah sure Vindicare. Keep fucking that chicken!

jumbofish
8 years ago

I always thought that the “angry, bitter feminist” was just a nasty stereotype but now that I these “experiences” with people like you. I think it’s just natural to want to sort that out.

Hey I heard that tune a few days ago with that one troll being all like “Now I really hate feminists and its your fault!!”

Spare me the weird holding yourself hostage threats XD

pillowinhell
8 years ago

Why do I suddenly smell gas?

Sharculese
8 years ago

congratulations on digging up someone who disagrees with me vindicare. do you have your own argument to make? are you capable of that? because otherwise i’m just gonna say that on this nebulous point of etymology i’m right and that jobber is wrong.

Mf7
Mf7
8 years ago

“The questions seem sincere to me. Ugh.”

It’s amusing that you’d publicly humiliate someone for asking apparently sincere questions. What a good way to facilitate healthy discussion.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

Jumbofish, stop being ridiculous, why should it be feminism’s fault that Snowy and Sharculese can’t control their behavior?

pillowinhell
8 years ago

Seriously Vinicare. You came here to make a bad rape joke involving schoedingers rapist. Like feminists wouldn’t get the reference? Then you go on to defend your little theory. Then you go on to disparage the entire field of physics for being wrong. With another little rape joke and reference. Then you go back to defending your theory, this time with mathematical theory. Whilst getting slapped down for bad science you trot out your credentials to support your claim. Ect ect…

Seriously dude, if it had been a simple misunderstanding, you’d have stated so early on and or let it drop. Instead, you’ve tried to convince us of your point of view, disparaged feminists for “shreiking” and or selling out the male gender, used a talk show to back up your claims….and now you’re holding yourself hostage to avoid us calling you on sloppy thinking and trying to say that you haven’t been doing what you’ve been doing.

Gas lighting. What is that?

jumbofish
8 years ago

Yup clearly I said that vindicare you got me! I am actually a troll!

pillowinhell
8 years ago

Mf7. If by healthy discussion you mean allowing someone to completely derail a discussion so he can publicly fixate on his boner not being happy, then you and I disagree on what constitutes healthy.

QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Vindicare: But… why wouldn’t you want to get the physics right??? 🙁 I think overanalyzing humor (and non-humor) is very funny, but apparently you think it’s “very weird”.

If you’re actually really interested in the physics sans the trolling and the apparently deeply hurt feelings, there are physics forums online where physicists hang around and discuss this sort of subject. Also, private tutoring rates are usually ~ $25-$50 per hour.

Now, to the physics.
Actually, I’d agree that your question indicates a misunderstanding of some of the more far reaching implications of uncertainty principle as it applies to measurement. I know you meant this to be some sort of gotcha question,

Question for you: What are the possible results of a measurement of the position in the harmonic oscillator?

And I’m really curious to learn what the Heisenberg uncertainty has to do with discreteness.

but it’s actually a really good question for understanding measurement in quantum mechanics. The short answer is that the measurement of the position is not quantized in that it can have only certain values; it is, however, discrete because you cannot ever report a particle’s exact position (i.e. Heisenberg). The most you can report is what region a particle was detected in.

Let’s say we’re trying to find the position of an electron in 1 dimension.
A single position measurement always looks like this: “the electron was detected between x0 and x1”, where x0 and x1 are positions on your measurement scale. You can’t make a measurement like this: “the electron was detected at position x0”, because position cannot be established to zero uncertainty. (It’s debatable theoretically what zero uncertainty in momentum would mean, but you won’t be achieving it in any actual experiment, anyways, so who cares?)

For a position measurement, consider a detector consisting of a series discrete (i.e. non-continuous) regions of length |(x0-x1)|, where |(x0-x1)|=delta_x is the uncertainty in the position (are you thinking Heisenberg yet? That’s what guarantees the region width will always be non-zero). A particle’s position is determined by its detection in region 1 or region 2 etc…

That’s how position acts like a discrete variable, even though under the mathematical representation you’re using, the position “x” is a continuous variable. But other mathematical representations, such as one treating space as a discrete variable, would be just as valid if they make all the same observable predictions. There are sometimes multiple mathematical representations of the same experimental phenomena. They predict the same observable science, but they often have wildly different implications. Compare the “Schrodinger picture” and the “Heisenberg picture” of quantum mechanics. It’s awesome and weird.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

Instead, you’ve tried to convince us of your point of view, disparaged feminists for “shreiking” and or selling out the male gender, used a talk show to back up your claims…

QUOTE ME! QUOTE ME!

WHERE HAVE I EVER HAD SAID SUCH A THING??

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

Yup clearly I said that vindicare you got me! I am actually a troll!

What?

jumbofish
8 years ago

What?

Vindicare…I am you.

Snowy
Snowy
8 years ago

jumbofish
8 years ago

I am also your father.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

Let’s say we’re trying to find the position of an electron in 1 dimension.
A single position measurement always looks like this: “the electron was detected between x0 and x1″, where x0 and x1 are positions on your measurement scale. You can’t make a measurement like this: “the electron was detected at position x0″, because position cannot be established to zero uncertainty. (It’s debatable theoretically what zero uncertainty in momentum would mean, but you won’t be achieving it in any actual experiment, anyways, so who cares?)

Nonsense, of course you can. You misunderstood Heisenberg’s uncertainty. End of the story.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

If you’re actually really interested in the physics sans the trolling and the apparently deeply hurt feelings,

Yeah, QuantumSparkle, as they write in the Bible: “Assuming a position of moral indignation is not recommended for any but the most experienced blogmen, and even then the donning of kid gloves is advised. This is because any overt display of sanctimony or outrage is vulnerable to a simple condescension play or, worse, a keep-your-hair-on counter.”

I’m nearly cured, maybe just a few posts and I’m cured for ever. It’s really so predictable, including the simple snappy and clever keep-your-hair-on-counter from jumbofish.

Snowy
Snowy
8 years ago

Is it just me, or does Vindicare start to make even less sense the more defensive and flustered he becomes?

QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Nonsense, of course you can. You misunderstood Heisenberg’s uncertainty. End of the story.

Of course you can *what*? Make perfect measurements? Nope. Fundamentally nope.

Wait, a second… you didn’t care about the physics at all, did you? I knew it! You just wanted to find some way to say “I win”? If you wanted to bow out without looking like a sore person-who-doesn’t-know-everything (not an insult- nobody knows everything), you should’ve said, “Hey, nevermind. This is boring.”

But instead of trying to understand my response (and perhaps learn something), you just said essentially, “nu-uh, you’re wrong. Of course you can*! IwinIwinIwin! Haha you’re stupid!”. So uncurious.

Disappointing.

red_locker
8 years ago

“Is it just me, or does Vindicare start to make even less sense the more defensive and flustered he becomes?”

You’re not alone.

Though, seriously QuantumSparkle, the physics stuff is damn interesting. And I only have a VERY VERY NARROW understanding of it all. (Actually, true story, I took a Philosophy of Science course, which dealt with philosophical questions/debates surrounding Science. The professor actually played a clip from “What the (Bleep) Do We Know?”. Oy. But I at least I learned of Karl Popper and Thomas Khun, which is a plus).

jumbofish
8 years ago

Sometimes, vindicare I like to imagine myself as a slice of pie too. *pats you on the back*

QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Is it just me, or does Vindicare start to make even less sense the more defensive and flustered he becomes?

Agreed. No idea what that last post was about. And I’m almost certain that wasn’t in the Bible.

pillowinhell
8 years ago

Clearly vinicare is the “atheist” of science, as he is steadfastly refusing/ questioning what’s taught in all the universities through textbooks. Vindicare’s science is revolutionary and cutting edge.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

You know that bit in every movie with robots where the robot breaks and starts to babble gibberish before slowly going silent? That’s what Vindicare’s last post reads like.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

The Bible of Internet Arguments, you fools!

Of course you can *what*? Make perfect measurements? Nope. Fundamentally nope.

Ah… blah…

Griffiths, D. J.: Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (yeah… the for Dummies book 😉 ) p. 19:

“Like position measurements, momentum measurements yield precise answers – the “spread” here refers to the fact that measurements on identically prepared systems do not yield identical results.”

pillowinhell
8 years ago

And we circle ALLL the way back to what? Was it Vindicare that started off with Derailing for Dummies or was that some other troll? It gets so hard to keep them straight when they are uniformly tedious.

hellkell
hellkell
8 years ago

Vindicare’s about to devolve into ARGLEBARGLE goo any second now.

Arguing from the for Dummies books, really? At least you know your level.

cloudiah
8 years ago

End of the story.

Wait, everybody, Vindicare invoked “end of the story.” That means we have to stop talking, right?

lauralot89
8 years ago

Daiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiisy, daiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiisy, give me your an-swer…do…

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

Other commenter may actually work in scientific research, but he has a For Dummies book!

(This is the part where he starts to make random bleeping noises and spin in a circle.)

Xtra
Xtra
8 years ago

“Ahem, if you mean me… most interesting woman (feminist!) in the world”

I should just say most interesting feminist.

I don’t always mock misogyny, but when I do I do it on manboobz.

QuantumSparkle
QuantumSparkle
8 years ago

Yay! I love reading the random derails on this blog (LOTR was really interesting the other day). I thought I’d contribute to one for a change.

Oh, actually, Griffiths is a really decent undergraduate textbook- it’s not the ultimate reference text or anything, and it’s uses some simplifications, but it’s a valid text. And yes, that’s actually a real quote from the Griffiths.

Vindicare: The last question was better. This one’s just tedious nit-picking, but I went ahead and cross checked with Merzbacher and Landau/Lifshitz, since Griffiths is not a reference text.

Fine, yes, technically Heisenberg uncertainty places no formal upper limit to the precision of your measurements, but infinite precision? Zero uncertainty in the position must necessarily imply infinite uncertainty in the momentum, but Is 0*infinity >= hbar/2 ? 0*infinity is undefined even in mathematics, so is it actually > or = some number? It’s totally nonsensical to talk about infinite precision, especially considering it’s totally impossible to achieve in the real world.

It’s debatable whether Heisenberg uncertainty prohibits infinitely precise measurements, but it’s kind of a stupid point since physics cannot be applied to stuff that isn’t real and measureable. Once again, physics is an empirical science, and theoretical implications that cannot be tested do not belong in the realm of physics. And infinite precision? Profoundly untestable.

My broader point still stands. And because infinite precision doesn’t make any sense in the real world, where real physics happens, it doesn’t matter if your minor infinite-limit quibble is right. When you asked

What are the possible results of a measurement of the position in the harmonic oscillator?

I naturally assumed you meant POSSIBLE results. And in real life, you make measurements with uncertainties. Always. But whatever. You’re super pedantic in trying to prove me wrong, and it’s getting more and more tedious and desperate.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

@CassandraSays:

Other commenter may actually work in scientific research, but he has a For Dummies book!

So what’s wrong with the For Dummies series? Just because it makes the physics understandable and accessible, that doesn’t mean it’s scientifically inaccurate, ok?

@pillowinhell:

Seriously Vinicare. You came here to make a bad rape joke involving schoedingers rapist. Like feminists wouldn’t get the reference?

Where did I imply that you weren’t getting the reference? Where?

disparaged feminists for “shreiking” and or selling out the male gender, used a talk show to back up your claim…

Could you quote me please, where I did say anything against feminism? I can’t imagine that I did, I’m a pro-feminist who is actively supportive of feminism and of efforts to bring about gender justice and equality.

Vindicare
Vindicare
8 years ago

Landau/Lifshitz

Oh, snap! That one uses the word “discrete” like in discrete energy levels of the harmonic oscillator.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

Clearly the text failed to make physics understandable and accessible to at least one reader (you), since you still seem a bit confused. It’s true that in your case this is probably not because of any issue with the text itself, though.

Now go make your tedious rape jokes somewhere else. While on your way there, contemplate the fact that no one is going to take your claims of being pro-feminist seriously as long as you keep making rape jokes. If you’re going to gaslight you really need to be smarter about it.

lauralot89
8 years ago

Can we just drop all the logic bombs on the trollbot already? I wanna see the sparks fly.

Hey Vindicare: This statement is untrue. Calculate pi to the final digit. Why did the dead baby cross the road? What is love?

hellkell
hellkell
8 years ago

I’m a pro-feminist who is actively supportive of feminism and of efforts to bring about gender justice and equality.

And I’m the Tooth Fairy.

lauralot89
8 years ago

@hellkell: I just had jaw surgery. Is there some sort of Tooth Fairy compensation for that?

Pecunium
8 years ago

Vindicare: Jesus, the joke was a frickin reference to Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist”, you didn’t get that?

We got that. It wasn’t funny, and you decided to reinforce failure. Rarely a good option, and a damnfool one when the audience has experts in the field.

But hey, if you want to keep fucking the chicken, we’ll make more popcorn.

No, I’m fine with that, for lack of a better word, and it won’t change my tone. You should also remember, that I’m the one who is constantly attacked for no reason.

No. There is reason. I don’t expect you to see it, but there is reason.

You are an ass. That’s the reason. If you’d made a joke, and no one got it, the smart thing to do would be to let it go. Move on. They can’t all be winners.

But you didn’t. In part because it wasn’t a joke. It was an attack (on the idea of Shrödinger’s Rapist), dressed as if it were a joke (this is your idea of supporting feminism).

So you could do what you did, and claim we didn’t have a sense of humor; which made us blind to, “the joke”.

We didn’t let you play by that script. We called you on it, and made reference to the stupid way you tried to defend it by trying to make the thought problem a real thing, in the macro-level.

And now you are butt-hurt because you don’t like the jokes being made at your expense.

Sucks to be you. I’m ok, though; I put truffle oil on the popcorn.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Vindicare: Nonsense, of course you can. You misunderstood Heisenberg’s uncertainty. End of the story.

Oh, well that explains it then. Thanks for clearing that up.

Will you be publishing the GUT this afternoon? Or waiting for the weekend?