Are you talking about the southport killings? The girls stabbed in the bathroom? Because that wasn't a muslim who did that
Also, this doesn't really have anything to do with your original idea, that this was something that would target black mothers and incite "a racial riot this summer unlike anything for decades...."
Seems you're just grabbing a random incident and pretending it's what you predicted.
Fair enough. The third law is more of a conception anyhow - i don't necessarily agree with it.
Okay, well then we've still got an issue with the contradiction in what we've discussed on gasses and how pressure is lower at higher atmospheres.
Either gas is ever expanding or gas is at rest upon the particles below it. Both cannot be simultaneously true.
But it does make things frightfully dull, both for you and the person attempting to converse with you.
I'm not in this conversation for entertainment, so that's fine.
If we want to discuss laws, then let's discuss laws as they've been established, not just your own summary.
I edited my comment, as I reread newton's third law.
Then why can't you or anyone else establish that empirically (i.e. scientifically)?
Copy/pasted from earlier:
If we're going to discuss laws, especially ones that you claim have been agreed upon by others, then we should discuss it as it is written, not using our own summations of what we think it says.
I'm sorry, but I will not entertain otherwise.
I'm not interested in hearing an anonymous individual's claim and spending time looking to prove it wrong.
but you can conceptualize it that way and everything works
But it doesn't. Either the gas is constantly expanding to fill a volume, or it is at rest atop other particles. Both can't be true simultaneously.
t's newtonian relativism. You may soundly conceptualize either, and or both forces as newtons third law requires you to.
But it's not an active force. It's a reactive force.
You cannot measure or find anyone who has measured anything to contradict the law.
Your anonymous statement is not law.
Because the gas has weight, and that weight exceeds the expansion force of the gas - it isn't.
But wouldn't that require the particles to be at rest, for their weight to affect objects (other particles) below?
The reason the law is that the gas pressure is derived from the container walls is because there are no measurements of gas pressure without such a container and there are only measurements of pressure inside a container.
Well, yeah because we're discussing the pressure of the gas against the walls.
In a rigid glass jar, there is no active pressure being pushed on the gas from the jar because the jar is rigid. It's only the pressure that the gas exerts on the container.
It continues to try to expand, as that is gas' nature.
Precisely! So it never comes to rest. As I've been saying.
Consider "my law" to be brand new, established only by me, and in no books. It is being published right here and right now, in this conversation. How can you possibly be sure that the law is incorrect, especially considering that you utterly fail to find any fault in it and cannot provide any measurement (your own or anyone esles) which contradicts it? Please attempt to answer this rhetorical question if you can.
My whole point is I have no desire to give weight to an anonymous someone's bare statement that has no supporting data and consider it to be a law.
surely this does not preclude the pressure the gas itself exerts in trying to expand the confines of the balloon.
Ah, so the gas is exerting pressure trying to expand the confines! Precisely.
So, we're back to a model where, logically, the pressure should be equal throughout the balloon, as the gas is working to expand outward
Surely you have encountered this newtonian relativism before? Centripetal vs centrifugal?
Not relevant here, actually! These are rotational forces. We're talking about air in a container.
The gas sits on the gas beneath it
But it's not sitting. It's expanding
It's not expanding in size infinitely, no, but the particles are infinitely working to expand, as futile as the efforts may be. The particles will never come to rest, especially not on top of one another. Even at equilibrium, the particles are still in motion at an atomic level.