@NoDoxGregBrady@BowsacNoodle@adequate@MartianM00n@cjd@Paultron@Victor_Emmanuel@threalist He answered it that way because there is, as far as I know, at least four explanations for magnetism, but there are probably more. The first comes from classical electrodynamics. "Moving charges produce magnetic fields!" The second comes from relativity. "Moving charges see length contraction, which changes the density of electric charges relative to other electric charges, changing the balance of forces between them". And then there is the quantum answers. "Magnetic forces are caused by electron’s spin, and give rise to a magnetic dipole moments" and "magnetic forces are a manifestation from the exchange of virtual photons when particles are in motion relative to each other."
The problem is that this gets into bigger questions. What is spin? What are magnetic dipole moments? What is length contraction. What are virtual photons?
I think what he was upset by is that people who answer these questions tend to make analogies to give the feeling that you understand it, but really don't. Basically, I think he was mad because I think he thought they were wanting him to give some "pop science" answer like "magnetic forces are like rubber bands".
@cjd@BowsacNoodle@MartianM00n@Paultron@Victor_Emmanuel@adequate@threalist To make sure I don't come off as a pedantic ass, most of physics doesn't work in 100% of cases. There are occasionally nice overlaps between subjects, but often the models just don't work. Models in physics gives you a prediction, but when you run the actual experiment you have lots of potential errors that cause deviations.
But even when they don't work in a certain case, we still use them for others because the math is easy to work with, or the accuracy we need isn't great enough to use more complex models.
Even the "shining jewels" of physics, Quantum mechanics, the Standard Model, and Relativity, are either incomplete, make incorrect predictions, or fail to predict certain phenomenon.
Now to be fair to them, afaik these three models have "passed" every test thrown at them, *but there are still lots of unexplained phenomenon and the general consensus is that we'll discover something strange someday that will upend one or all of these models. But we will still also use them because they worked so well up to a certain point.
There's no way for a biologically healthy individual to be the wrong sex, or in the wrong body, anymore than they can be the wrong species. To believe so implies the existence of a soul, and also the existence of someone who is responsible for placing souls into bodies, as well as being capable of making mistakes. If you think this, then you believe in an imperfect god, in the existence of souls, and possible in a "pre-life", and so it is religious.
Transgenders are one of two groups:
1) Male perverts who have a fetish of being their own girlfriend (autogynophiliacs).
2) Men and women who WISH they were a different sex. Men wish they were females because modern society is very hostile to men and maleness (describing normal male behavior as toxic, not allowing them to have their own spaces within society, and placing barriers for male success in education and careers). Women with they were male because they have bought into a false idea that society gives men preferential treatment, and they are made to feel ashamed of being female or anything feminine (such as portraying motherhood as degrading). There is also significant overlaps between sexual assault victims and transgenders. In all respects, it's an attempt to distance one self from their true selves, either out of shame or self loathing.
The real problem is that we have an unhealthy society that promotes self loathing. It does not reward either masculinity or femininity. It's a contrarian culture that seeks to erode and destroy social norms and unity, with the hope of causing chaos. This is one of the many strategies being used.