@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
I can come up with a new scale, and call it the Kramer scale. It ranges from ‘as cold as a witch’s tit to hot as hell, in increments of 3.14.
All you really need to understand is ‘cold’ and ‘hot’. and how those are different.
Left and right are also scalable, in the gestalt at least. with one end being as far left as you can get, and the other end being as far right as you can get.
This isn’t rocket science, and I think you are belaboring this point not because you fail to understand how irrelevant this is, but because you wish to annoy me. I have no idea WHY, except possibly you are annoyed that I don’t see someone you support as anything but a right winger, or something like that, and you are annoyed. This is a you problem, not a me problem.
In any case, the discussion is terminated.
🇳🇱
I can come up with a new scale, and call it the Kramer scale. It ranges from ‘as cold as a witch’s tit to hot as hell, in increments of 3.14.
Ok so in this scale (which actually no you cant do) that is 0 (coldest) to 100 (hottest) and apparently only moves in multiples of 3.14 …. the Krammer scale… lets go with this.
In this scale, if you have a 100 krammer temperature, what temperature would that be on the celsius scale? Lets assume whatever temperature that is happens to be some value X on the celsius scale… Now the important follow up… if you have a celsius temperature of X+10, what would that be in the krammer scale? Oh look, its impossible to answer that because your scale is impossible at actually quantifying temperature… funny that.
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
“which actually no you cant do”
I literally just did it.
@freemo @JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei I think it’s a pointless argument.
Oh it is absolutely clear at this point this argument with Jon is pointless… when he plays these sorts of dishonest games there is no point.. you can make a perfect argument a toddler could understand and he would still deny it.
Actually this and my other comment was a bit too harsh, sorry about that. I shouldnt have been quite so aggressive in the personal attack, even if you were acting in bad-faith, i escalated. So sorry.
@JonKramer
No you literally failed to do it. You tried to misrepresent the original question (a temperature that is bounded on one side at 0 and goes to infinity) and instead were manipulative and dishonest and tried to change the change and the axiom just so you could find a way to make it look like you answered it even though you didnt address the actual question at all.
@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei