My Thread… Regarding The Truth about so called ‘Objective Aiming Systems’ such as CTE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shawn Armstrong said:
The edge of a ball, or what us math people call a "sphere", is a point that is equidistant from the geometric centre of the sphere. That distance would be r, otherwise known as the radius. You can pick any point on the "ball", and guess what....it's the exact same distance from the centre as any other point. No matter what point you're looking at, on the ball, it is the same distance away from the centre as any other point you could possibly look at.

The "edge" you keep referring to would be the point that is visually furthest from the geometric centre of the ball. It can be seen, and can be established as clear as day by anyone with standard visual acuity. If you couldn't assess where the edge of a ball is, cueball or object ball, you couldn't use ghost ball, or any other method of aiming. If you care to take on this challenge, here's how you'd do it. Get two balls of radically different size. Use "ghost ball" to establish your aiming point. See if the ball goes in. Oh, wait...it won't. Because the equators of the balls won't touch, so you'll actually undercut (or overcut) every shot, except a straight in. But, seeing as you guys say edges don't exist, it would be absolutely impossible to make a straight in, because you need to aim centre to centre. Tell me...how do you approximate centre if you can't see a left or right edge?

Explain away.....I gotta hear this.
Click to expand...

Replace the ball with a square cube & see the right edge line where the sides meet. Walk right or left in the room & you will see the same edge line.

You can not do that with a sphere. The edge line will change.

That is the context of the discussion regarding objectivity vs subjectivity.

If you & I stand two feet apart & look at that cube on the table we will both see the same right edge line. It is an objective line.

If you & I stand two feet apart & look at a spherical ball on the table we will NOT both see the same physical 'edge' line.

That makes the 'edge' line of a spherical ball subjective & dependent on one's physical position as to what physical 'edge' line one would see.

Now I would guess that you know we're speaking of the 'edge' point on the equator of the ball.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
 
Last edited:
ENGLISH! said:
Replace the ball with a square cube & see the right edge line where the sides meet. Walk right or left in the room & you will see the same edge line.

You can not do that with a sphere. The edge line will change.

That is the context of the discussion regarding objectivity vs subjectivity.

If you & I stand two feet apart & look at that cube on the table we will both see the same right edge line. It is an objective line.

If you & I stand two feet apart & look at a spherical ball on the table we will NOT both see the same physical 'edge' line.

That makes the 'edge' line of a spherical ball subjective & dependent on one's physical position as to what physical 'edge' line one would see.

Now I would guess that you know we're speaking of the 'edge' point on the equator of the ball.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
Click to expand...

I'd explain to you where you and Duckie are quite confused between what a corner and an edge are, but I can't be bothered. Go about proving the world is flat.
 
ENGLISH! said:
That's uncalled for.

He is technically correct.

The supposed edge point of a sphere on the equator would constantly change as one moves their view of vision laterally.

Hence it is ONLY 'defined' by one setting their vision perfectly still.
Click to expand...

Congratulations. You have just found the objectivity in CTE.
 

Attachments

  • edge of a circle.png
    edge of a circle.png
    30.4 KB · Views: 116
Shawn Armstrong said:
I'd explain to you where you and Duckie are quite confused between what a corner and an edge are, but I can't be bothered. Go about proving the world is flat.
Click to expand...

There are multiple uses for the term edge as in the edge of the forest, at the edge of the sea, the edge of a knife, the edge of a table... the edge of the earth.

By your earlier 'definition', every point on the endless number of circumferences of the sphere is an edge point.

I understand that, but...

context of the discussion is at times of importance.

Why is it that some individuals make comments & when a discussion begins that is not completely in agreement with their comment they make an excuse that infers they are correct & the other wrong & then they 'make an exist'?

Especially after making an insulting comment to an individual.

Best Wishes to ALL.
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/vertices-faces-edges.html

Here's a great page for the two guys that can't seem to define what an edge is.

The fact that both of you keep referring to "balls" would imply you can see that these "balls" you speak of are circular/spherical. If you can ascertain that they're circles, guess what......you can see edges. Big step today, guys. You're nearly there!
Click to expand...

I have already given that explanation to Duckie/Greg as a point for discussion purposes.

You're not teaching anyone anything here but seem to be just inflating your own perception of... shall we say, yourself.

Best Wishes to ALL.
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/vertices-faces-edges.html

Here's a great page for the two guys that can't seem to define what an edge is.

The fact that both of you keep referring to "balls" would imply you can see that these "balls" you speak of are circular/spherical. If you can ascertain that they're circles, guess what......you can see edges. Big step today, guys. You're nearly there!
Click to expand...

http://www.ck12.org/geometry/Faces-...n/Faces-Edges-and-Vertices-of-Solids-Grade-7/

Now...go back under your rock.....then again this is 7th grade stuff which maybe over CTE users head
 
Last edited:
JB Cases said:
Maybe not. But you found the objectivity in CTE nonetheless.

Think about what "Fixed Cue Ball" means.
Click to expand...

Yes John,

Have you actually read ANY of the recent discussions?

Once you define the 'edge' by the line from the center CB to the 'edge' of the OB along with the other line of CB 'edge' to X of the OB, the CB & the relationship between the two balls is 'objectively' FIXED.

From that position, only two 'objective' outcome angles are possible, one relative to each direction of the very precisely defined pivot.

ANY OTHER, I repeat, ANY OTHER outcome angled line is ONLY possible by fudging in some manner OFF of the OBJECTIVE LINE, changing the amount of the 1/2 tip pivot, or steering the cue.

The amount of that fudging is 100% subjective.

There has been NO objective instructions or directions on HOW to objectively determine the amount to move off of that line other than saying, 'move until you see it, move until you see the proper perception for the shot'. That process is purely & 100% subjective process in getting to the actual shot line.

Once one is on the line of the objectively fixed relationship between the two balls there is NOTHING, I repaet, NOTHING that objectively indicates what the actual shot line is.

That is the issue regarding the 5 shots & the fact that all 5 shots are NOT be made 'OBJECTIVELY' off of the same visual & pivot without subjective fudging OFF of the objective line.

NO ONE, I repeat, ON ONE has given ANY instructions or descriptions for ANY objective influence to make that occur.

The only thing said is that the balls 'present' themselves differently depending on where they are on the table. That is science bending & not possible in any objective manner.

So...ALL that has been said is, 'move until you see the proper perception'.

THAT is no instructions at ALL... at least not of any objective nature or structure.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
 
Last edited:
JB Cases said:
I made it easier for them.
Click to expand...

The patronizing ridicule & the self inflating of EGOS is a bit ridiculous.

I basically have 3 years of physics education & Greg has shown that he's NOT unintelligent.

We understand that a circle can be considered as a ONE plane, ONE cross cut section of a spherical ball at the center line.

Do you and others understand the reality of the difference of the 3 dimensional sphere?

Best Wishes to ALL.
 
ENGLISH! said:
Yes John,

Have you actually read ANY of the recent discussions?

Once you define the 'edge' by the line from the center CB to the 'edge' of the OB along with the other line of CB 'edge' to X of the OB, the CB & the relationship between the two balls is 'objectively' FIXED.

From that position, only two 'objective' outcome angles are possible, one relative to each direction of the very precisely defined pivot.

ANY OTHER, I repeat, ANY OTHER outcome angled line is ONLY possible by fudging in some manner OFF of the OBJECTIVE LINE, changing the amount of the 1/2 tip pivot, or steering the cue.

The amount of that fudging is 100% subjective.

There has been NO objective instructions or directions on HOW to objectively determine the amount to move off of that line other than saying, 'move until you see it, move until you see the proper perception for the shot'. That process is purely & 100% subjective process in getting to the actual shot line.

Once one is on the line of the objectively fixed relationship between the two balls there is NOTHING, I repaet, NOTHING that objectively indicates what the actual shot line is.

That is the issue for the 5 shots & the fact that all 5 cshots an NOT be made 'OBJECTIVELY' off of the same visual & pivot without subjective fudging OFF of the objective line.

NO ONE, I repeat, ON ONE has given ANY instructions or descriptions for ANY objective influence to make that occur.

The only thing said is that ball present themselves differently depending on where they are on the table. That is science bending & not possible in any objective manner.

So...ALL that has been said is, 'move until you see the proper perception'.

THAT is no instructions at ALL... at least not of any objective nature or structure.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
Click to expand...

Well, thanks once again for showing us all that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to using CTE. I don't know what system you are talking about above, but it sure isn't CTE.
 
duckie said:
And contact points are visible.....yeah right.

All you have to do is show me a edge on a ball.....edge being two planes that meet at a angle. No such thing exists on a ball.

I always know where to place the CB without seeing any form of a "ghost".
Click to expand...

Greg, I'll give you that technically, there are no edges on a sphere. But, you constantly saying it when you know exactly what everyone else on earth means by it, is rather anal, don't you think? Especially when it comes from a guy that believes in contact patches. There are no patches on the table showing one where to place the center of the cb. I'm sure you must realize this. But, if you really are seeing contact patches, you just might have a different problem.
 
duckie said:
http://www.ck12.org/geometry/Faces-...n/Faces-Edges-and-Vertices-of-Solids-Grade-7/

Now...go back under your rock.....then again this is 7th grade stuff which maybe over CTE users head
Click to expand...

Greg,

I was in 7th. grade when I started using english on nearly every shot.

I was going to say something else but I thought 'better' of it.

So... I said the thing about being in 7th grade when starting to use english.

It's rather difficult at times to not fire back in 'kind'.

But I find it rather difficult to believe that anyone here is lacking in sufficient intelligence.

It's more of what Poolplaya9 said, IMO.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
 
Nope.......if you present hard facts to people, facts that are accepted conventions, facts that are taught in school and those people ignore those facts it makes me wonder about their intelligence.

You can google "does a sphere have edges", and all you will find is the answer no. Yet when presented with this fact and it gets ignore in order to perpetuate a myth, it is a sure sign of lack of intelligence.
 
Neil said:
Well, thanks once again for showing us all that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to using CTE. I don't know what system you are talking about above, but it sure isn't CTE.
Click to expand...

Balderdash!

More of the same old same old from you with no explanation of the objective how & why without bending science into a pretzel.

I'm actually glad you posted though, as you were completely out of my mind & I probably would have forgot to say my prayers regarding you.

Best Wishes to You & ALL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top