Home › Forums › Philosophy › Relative to the Trolling in the Philosophy Section
This topic contains 49 replies, has 12 voices, and was last updated by 
Anonymous 1 year, 1 month ago.
- AuthorPosts
Gravel Pit has the right idea with his extended “foreign language” replies. Otherwise, just ignore the troll.
Gravel pit has no idea, hence why he subliminally chose the name gravel pit.
The Ten Digit system came about because primitive people can count their fingers on their hands. We have ten digits total. As Faust points out this not the best system for science and reasoning.
The Ancients believed 60 was the best because it divides nicely into a circle and they were very much cyclical minded (being students of Astronomy). We still use the sexagesimal system when measuring units of time i.g. 60 seconds in a minute and so forth. 60 is a good base for cyclical phenomena that’s why Tesla chose 60Hz for the USA Alternating Current standard.
Personally, I agree with Faust and I do typically use the Hexadecimal system quite often for Engineering work. It consists of numbers 0-9 and letters A-F representing (10,11,12,13,14,15) respectively. 16 digits total and all perfectly divisible down to one. This is what Pythagoras would have called “The Perfect Numbers.” All the powers of 2.I have a proof, not the proof, of why the babylonians did what they did and the foundation of the degree.
The degree is an extension of a law of relativity, where one part exists as both composed of and composing other parts. It is strictly inversion where unity is inverted to multiplicity through void (pdf point space).
This may sound way to abstract, so I will copy and paste the foundation of the degree argument at some other time, as well as 0d point space (synonymous to dark matter or black holes) as the foundation for atomism.
John Doe, I believe we have come to an understanding.
And I use this as evidence of the dignity of reasoning and dialect.
Thank you.
Though, after thinking on my own comments, I still believe a even number digit system would be better than an odd digit system with 9 digits. Such as an even digit system of eight digits would be 0-7. Maybe this is one of the reasons why seven is considered a special number, but separate from 3, 6, and 9 in importance.
Anonymous1The degree is an extension of a law of relativity, where one part exists as both composed of and composing other parts. It is strictly inversion where unity is inverted to multiplicity through void (pdf point space).
Unity inverted is just unity, not zero. You can invert any number by raising it to the -1 power. You will always get a nonzero number. Your underlying premise that the inversion of unity (one) is void (zero) is not correct.
Anonymous1I have a proof, not the proof, of why the babylonians did what they did and the foundation of the degree.
The Sexagesimal system makes sense when you understand the universe in terms of Vibration, Frequency and Energy as Tesla said. You can divide it into a circle very nicely. 360 written in Sexagesimal is 60. You see how nice that is. They were Stargazers and Mathematicians they used what worked best for them.
Think about it this way. If we still used Sexagesimal: 60 seconds (a minute) would be written as 10 seconds. 3600 seconds (an hour) would be written as 100 seconds. The only down side is you have to remember 60 different characters for your digits.
It looks as if Gargamel is back for more.
"Once you’ve taken care of the basics, there’s very little in this world for which your life is worth deferring." -David Hansson. "It’s not when women are mean or nasty that anything is out of the ordinary. It’s when they are NICE to you that you have to be on high alert..." -Jackinov.
The degree is an extension of a law of relativity, where one part exists as both composed of and composing other parts. It is strictly inversion where unity is inverted to multiplicity through void (pdf point space).
Unity inverted is just unity, not zero. You can invert any number by raising it to the -1 power. You will always get a nonzero number. Your underlying premise that the inversion of unity (one) is void (zero) is not correct.
No, reread it because you read it wrong. Unity is inverted to unit, with a unit existing relative to another unit thus necessitating multiplicity. A unit is an approximate of unity as it observes unity through multiplicity. Each unit mirrors unity, as an extension of unity, but is not unity in itself but rather exists through it.
I did not argue unity results in zero when inverted.
Take for example a 1 dimensional line. It is defined by its projective nature on one direction. This projective nature however it towards the same 0d point it originates from.
The line however must project, as it is defined by its directional nature. The line if it is too project. Must project relative to another line as 1 projective direction.
So the line projecting towards one 0d point effectively causes a line to project from the opposite direction, considering in projecting away from its origins (the 0d point) the line is projecting towards its origins (the 0d point).
The 0d point, as nothing, inverts 1 directional movement into many directional movements (2 in this case).
Now this next argument is an abstract of an original argument, and is the short version of 100+ pages.
The same applies for a theoretical 1 dimensional point of pure movement. The 1d point can only be observed as multiple 1d points that are connected through negative dimensional lines. The points move through the points as point, hence any connection is an approximation of the 1 point from which all originates. The negative dimensional lines are strictly imaginary, as in the give image to the 1d point, but effectively are nothing in themselves but connectors and lack movement.
The 1d point, which contains all and is all, is hidden by the 0d point which acts as a field (all points are boundless fields as the projection from on point to another makes on point a boundless field.
For example a line between to points observes a third point through which the whole scenario takes place.). The 1d point is observed approximately through multiple 1d points because the 0d point as void is strictly immersive and nothing in itself.In simpler terms:
Just invert the 0d point as nothing to a 1d everything, and the 1d line as directional to a -1d line as absent of direction except through the points they connect.
Comsidering all phenomena occur through a directive quality, where what is moving exists and movement cannot exist without direction, void as 0d point space effectively acts as the inversion between unity and multiplicity.
Nothing is an observation of multiple relations as only being cam be observed.
It looks as if Gargamel is back for more.
You tell me…your the one with the useless comment.
I have a proof, not the proof, of why the babylonians did what they did and the foundation of the degree.
The Sexagesimal system makes sense when you understand the universe in terms of Vibration, Frequency and Energy as Tesla said. You can divide it into a circle very nicely. 360 written in Sexagesimal is 60. You see how nice that is. They were Stargazers and Mathematicians they used what worked best for them.
Think about it this way. If we still used Sexagesimal: 60 seconds (a minute) would be written as 10 seconds. 3600 seconds (an hour) would be written as 100 seconds. The only down side is you have to remember 60 different characters for your digits.You can divide anything into a circle real nicely, I will post the argument when am not on an iPad.
All degrees are merely the relation of geometric figures within a circle, hence the degree is foundation in the relation of one part to another the number of times a geometric object fits in a circle with all geometric objects as approximates of the circle.
The resonant frequency of the earth, a sphere, will vary with variations in other spheres where each planet has it’s own resonant frequency. The sexagesimal system is premised on a beginning point of relation being the sphere of the earth.
Time is relative and changes according to the sphere, with variations in gravity (as the pull of one object to another) changing according to the density of the sphere.
Anonymous1You can divide anything into a circle real nicely, I will post the argument when am not on an iPad.
No that doesn’t make sense. You can’t divide 50 into a circle nicely. Try working with 50Hz sometime and you will see what I mean.
Your argument about dimension is very confusing. You will have to clarify what you mean by “dimension.”
For example we can talk about the dimension of Time. Time is a linear dimension measured in the SI unit Seconds.
We can talk about space. Space is measured in the SI unit Meters. We can talk about Linear Space M. We can talk about Squared Space M^2. We can talk about Cubic Space M^3. This is often incorrectly referred to as 1D, 2D and 3D space. There is no 0D space because that would always be one. Anything raised to the zero power is always one.
Then there is the famous “Space-Time” Dimension. This is what is called a Derivative dimension. This dimension can only exist as derived from both Space and Time. An example would be Velocity or Acceleration.
Anonymous1This may sound way to abstract, so I will copy and paste the foundation of the degree argument at some other time, as well as 0d point space (synonymous to dark matter or black holes) as the foundation for atomism.
Dark Matter is the modern physicist attempting to cover up the serious blunder they made when they dropped the Aether model from their physics text books. Now they have all this Mass in “empty space” that they cannot account for. They wouldn’t need such ideas if they had listened to Tesla and Heaviside.
Read J.J. Thomson “Electricity and Matter” for more information on why an Electric Line of Force can have Momentum. Thomson was the discoverer of the Electron. An Electron is just one Electric Line of Force. The smallest unit of Electric Charge.
Anonymous1The degree is an extension of a law of relativity, where one part exists as both composed of and composing other parts. It is strictly inversion where unity is inverted to multiplicity through void (pdf point space).
Ok I re-read this part because you said I read it wrong. I’m not following what you are saying here. You are saying “Unity is Inverted.” Every time I read that I see this 1^(-1). One raised to the negative one power. Hence Unity Inverted.
Perhaps it would be easier to just write the Mathematics. I’m not seeing how else to interpret this statement.
It looks as if Gargamel is back for more.
Not Gargamel, but one like him with the “superiority complex”. You think if it was Gargamel he’d be able to resist posting a cat pic, or 3,000 of them?
The evil in women’s hearts leaves them no moral bounds as to inhibit them from descending to the lowest levels of darkness to acquire their self entitled desires.
At least I’ve got the HomePage back now. I wasn’t able to load it for 24hrs. Do these guys, the ones pulling this s~~~, know that they are screwing the forum up for others too???
At least I’ve got the HomePage back now. I wasn’t able to load it for 24hrs. Do these guys, the ones pulling this s~~~, know that they are screwing the forum up for others too???
Do they care?
The evil in women’s hearts leaves them no moral bounds as to inhibit them from descending to the lowest levels of darkness to acquire their self entitled desires.
You can divide anything into a circle real nicely, I will post the argument when am not on an iPad.
No that doesn’t make sense. You can’t divide 50 into a circle nicely. Try working with 50Hz sometime and you will see what I mean.
Your argument about dimension is very confusing. You will have to clarify what you mean by “dimension.”
For example we can talk about the dimension of Time. Time is a linear dimension measured in the SI unit Seconds.
We can talk about space. Space is measured in the SI unit Meters. We can talk about Linear Space M. We can talk about Squared Space M^2. We can talk about Cubic Space M^3. This is often incorrectly referred to as 1D, 2D and 3D space. There is no 0D space because that would always be one. Anything raised to the zero power is always one.
Then there is the famous “Space-Time” Dimension. This is what is called a Derivative dimension. This dimension can only exist as derived from both Space and Time. An example would be Velocity or Acceleration.This post will be long, so bear with it and you may want to read it a few times. It applies to the points you are making and addresses them from a symmetrical, but different, angle of perception.
1. A dimension:
“a property of space; extension in a given direction”
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/dimensionAnd this in turn observes an inherent problem within the field of measurement, as the base foundation for all dimension breaks down to not just one direction, but this direction implying an inherent form of movement. That which is directed is that which moves.
In observing the dimension we are left fundamentally with directed movement as the foundation.
The question of any unit of measurement results in a basic paradox. If I use a foot for example. The foot is composed of 12 inches. The foot is a relation of parts. The inch in turn is composed of 16 parts and follows the same nature as the the foot. The foot is compose of inches which is composed of fractions of inches, which in turn is composed of further fractions.
This leads to an infinite regress.
Considering the foot is “part” of a yard, and the yard is part of the mile, etc. it progresses infinitely in another direction.
While we generally, after a certain quantity of any give measurement, revert it to fractals or multiples, the problem occurs in the respect each measurement is a fractal or multiple of another measurement.
The 1 directional line is a constant in these respects, but it is a self-sustained measurement system. A line is used to measure a line as a line and we observe a repitition of symmetry in determining various lengths. Geometric spatial axioms, such as the point, line or circle are used as constants in determining the structure of some phenomenon and these axioms are effectively self-referencing and existing through eachother.
This observes cycles and points (where a phenomenon inverts).
Tesla’s mirrors this basic triad of the point, line and circle in the quote you reference:
“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”
a. Energy can be observed strictly as movement or point space, where one phenomenon is inverted into another. This “movement” is energy, and the standard equation of E=MC2 is strictly an observation of mass (formlessness) multiplied by speed (direction). Energy is directed movement, and is premised in “inversion”.
b. Frequency is a rate in which something occurs. It is repetition. It is an extension of Point A, where “point space” as the origin of energy (through inversion) effectively repeats itself. The point repeated is the point directed and we are left with frequency observing a synonymous nature to the line, where the line is strictly a point directed away from itself through itself.
c. Vibration can be observed as an oscillation. This osillation, as one point moving in a circular manner away from its origin and back to its origin (effectively in all direction if we view each movement in a cycle as strictly a linear progression where the point going from 12 o clock to 12:01 observers the point projected as one line if continued away from the clock, 12:02 as another line if continued away from the clock, etc.). Vibration observes a quality of self-maintainance through points A and B above, where the point through circularity is self-referencing.
However this triad is not limited to physics as well, but all phenomenon psychological as well considering the premise of “all is mind” equates physics to a framework of mind, a divine mind in this case, where perpetual energy is the generation of “space” (see the pardox of the wheel, road and creation of space thread…space is created through space as space is self-referencing and exists as its own system of measurement, which we can see in the base definition of “dimension” very loosely.)
The cycles of nature and mechanics mirror the cycles of thought and emotions where we observe a continual mirroring of constants as a binding median. Take for example a basic habit. I wake up and take a shower. This habit becomes ingrained in my character and becomes part of the daily movements which form me. A synonymous term would be “discipline” if applied to exercise, work, prayer, meditation, etc.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Relative to the Hz Argument, I am not arguing against 60 Hz working…you are correct. But it has to be kept in mind this 60 Hz may be the most efficient relative to the “sphere” of the earth, it may not be universal to other planets. Tesla’s work was less about creating energy, but rather directing what was already present. I agree with your point in half, I just believe it applies relative to the earth’s electromagnetic system.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. What we observe as time is strictly relations between movement. For simplicity we will use a 24 hour clock as an example. Aω is equivalent 86,400 seconds being the potential relations of one cycle as “day”. Bϕ, is the actual relations at 3:00 a.m or 10,800 seconds.
As actual relations, Bϕ is a grade of Aω as:T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
…………Bϕ………………………………………..10,800ϕ(ignore the dots, they are just for spacing)
Bϕ has a constant state of change added to it, considering it is in a constant state of movement. This span of change relative to Aω, maintains a window of movement through A – B equivalent to 75,600.
T=________Aω________ → T= ________86,400ω______
………………Bϕ + (A-B)ϕ…………………10,800ϕ+ 75,600ϕAdding (A – B) to Bϕ, or 10,800+ 75,600, does not take into account the change as progression from B → A as 1 cycle of movement, or 10,800 → 86,400 as 1 cycle.
This change begins with 10,800+1/(1 ≤ x) . This is considering all measurements of unity begin with 1 or a fraction of 1 as potential unity, with this unity itself equivalent to the second.
It ranges to 10,800 + 75,600 therefore is equal to 1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (A-B) where BΔ is equivalent to a constant change.
T=______________Aω___________ → T= ____________86,400ω_____________
……..Bϕ +(1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (A-B)…………………..10,800ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤BΔ ≤75,600)ϕThis constant change ranges from 1/(1 ≤ x) to 75,600 and is indefinite as pinpointing one movement causes a change in the measurement. Take for example observing three seconds later at 10,803 causes a change in the measurements as:
T= ____________ 86,400ω_____________
………..10,803ϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ 75,597)ϕBΔ is equivalent to a constant state of change as relation. This change acts as linear relation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and (A – B). In these respects BΔ, as change observes an approximation between 1/(1 ≤ x) and 75,597.
Using the example above and observing a measurement where the cycle is complete the equation can be observed as:T= __________86,400ω__________ → T= _________1ω___________
………..86,400ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ )ϕ………..1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ )ϕConsidering 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) would require 1ω to exist as a fraction of:
_____1ω_____ → ____1ω____
(1ϕ+ 1ϕ = BΔ)…….(2ϕ = BΔ)if 1/( 1 )= BΔ then; 1ϕ+ (1/(1 ≤ x)≤ BΔ ) must change to:
T= __________1ω___________
……..1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕWhere x is equivalent to a number that tends towards infinity. In these respects Time is always approximate as it is always divided by a continuous change at the peak of its cycle as the perpetual relation of particulate. In these respects what we understand of time is merely approximation of movement.
In summary Time is equivalent to Potential Particulate relations divided by Actual Particulate Relations plus a fraction less than or equal to one that is less than or equal to Actual particulate change which is less than or equal to A minus B.
T= ____________Aω____________ → ___________1ω___________
………Bϕ + (1/(1 ≤ x) ≤ BΔ ≤ (A-B))ϕ………(1ϕ + (1/(1≪(n →∞)) = BΔ )ϕ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4. This is in reference to points 1,2,3 as observing the nature of “parts within parts as parts” being the foundation of not just measurement but subject to a law of “Relativity”.
The foundation of the “degree” as a relation of geometric forms.
1) The circle is the universal form through which all forms exist.
2) The triangle, as three points, exists 120 times within a circle of 360 degrees with each point acting as a degree in itself. Hence as 120 times the angles which form the interior of the triangle (from the center point) form the interior of the triangle as 120 degrees.
3) The square, as four points, exists 90 times within a circle of 360 degrees with each point acting as a degree in itself. Hence as 90 times the angles which form the interior of the square exist as internal 90 degrees.
4) The pentagon, as five points, exists 72 times within a circle of 360 degrees with each point acting as a degree in itself. Hence as 72 times the angles which form the interior of the pentagon exist as internal 72 degrees.
5) The hexagon exists 60 times with an internal degree of 60.
6) The septagon exists 51.4287 times with an internal degree of the same.
7) The octagon exists 45 times with an internal degree of the same.
8) The nonagon exists 40 times with an internal degree of the same.
9) The Decagon exists 36 times with an internal degree of the same.
10) The 1 directional line exists 360 times as 1 degree with the 2 directional line existing 180 times as an observation of 180 degrees.
All degree, through angulature, exists as relation of linear dimensions and is subject to the number of relations measured, hence the degree changes with the number of “x” shapes applied to the circle. Measurement itself is relativistic.
The circle is composed of infinite geometric forms as a unity of geometric form where each geometric form as a part is effectively an approximation of the circle.
All geometric forms are extensions of the circle, the circle is an extension of infinite geometric forms.
The foundation of all geometric forms are equal distance between points.
The number of points stemming from centerpoint of the circle (shape as interior angulature stemming from a center point) exists as a dual expression of geometric form as exterior connected points without center point.
This observes all non-equilateral shapes as movement from center-point of circle with shape effectively equalizing if center point is reconsitutued to center point of circle as a sphere, or either the shape or circle move to align centers. This is considering with non-equilateral shapes the center of mass changes with change of exterior angulature. (need diagram for this paragraph)
The number of shapes determine the interior angles and the number of degrees which compose them; hence the degree is subject to change based upon the quantity of shapes.
For example a triangle existing 120 times in a circle equal interior angle stemming from center point equals 120 degrees.
1200 triangles equals 1200 degrees.
Hence the degree equates strictly to a quantity and not just a quality, where space itself (embodied through the line as a direct which inevitably is a direction of 1 as 1) is a number. The degree as “1” is effectively 1/360 and 360 times as both whole numbers and fractions exist as duals through eachother. In these respects 1 exists through 360 and 360 exists through 1, with the degree as 1/1000 and 1000 or 1/10000 and 10000 observering the degrees effectively as an alternation between 1 and 1000 or 1 and 10000.
With the increase of degrees comes an increase in the septagon as a rational number (considering it is and expression of 51.4285… degrees. However considering the center interior degrees of the septagon are irrational this extension goes on forever.
So 1/(n→∞) and (n→∞) observes the degree as becoming progressively more accurate through the septagon as a number approaching infinity, where because the septagon is irrational it forever repeats the fractal of .428571 and an inherent degree of alternation occurs.
The degree as premised in relation as dualism of multiplication and division, that exists effectively under a finite set of relations of geometric forms that paradoxically must continue ad-infinitum if the forms are to be maintained through a progressive linearism, effectively observes the circle as infinite points expanding through infinite degrees (as each degree is premised on point in the circle) where 1 as a line through the degree effectively moves towards a value of point zero as it exists as a fraction of the whole (in this case the circle).
The continual movement of 1, as a line synonymous to the degree, towards 0 ad-infinitum shows a dual multiplication of 1 where the progression of 1 away from 0 is a progression of 1 towards point 0 with the progression of whole numbers as multiples of 1 or increase in fractals of 1 observing a directive nature where multiplication and division are inevitably linked to a directive nature of the line.
In these respects multipliciation and division observe 1 folding through itself through the 0d point.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Darkmatter may effectively be just “void” or “0d point space”. Keep in mind if moving towards any point in space, that point unfolds into further phenomena where the point as constant simultaneously acts as a field. Take for example I stare at a point in space. I walk towards it. Reality unfolds around me. A tree or car may pop up, as well as a variety of other phenomenon. While the point is always a point, it perpetually unfolds can contains everything while acting as a boundless field in a seperate respect.
Relativity may strictly be premised in 0d point space, where the point continually inverts to further phenomenon. Relativity, in these respects is premised in “atomism” or “parts”.
Tesla’s ether theory, took a wholistic approach where everything exists as one moment and he was effectively directing it. This ether would be synonymous to a 1d point where everything is contained and movement does not exist except as an approximation of this “unity” where we see it effectively in parts.
Relativity is an approximation of absolute truth, where we see absolute truth in a multiplicity of manners approximately. If everything exists as a 1d point, then the 0d point is a veil through which we see phenomenon approximately.
It all breaks down to point space at the end of the day.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6. Inversion is synonymous to “reversal”. Unity (imagine everything as a condensed point of white light) being reversed, at first sounded like it makes no sense. However if everything is directed movement, then this Unity is directed through itself as itself as pure movement; hence pure being. The reversal of this unity, as directed towards itself, would be for it to be directed away from itself.
However it cannot be directed away from itself as it is itself. It would have to effectively cease direction so to speak, where it is directed towards nothingness. Considering Unity would have to both direct towards itself and nothing, unity is maintain by its self direction. However in directing towards nothingness it mirrors nothing by becoming symmetrical to it. It cancels itself out.
Again, however what exists exists as is, hence any cancellation of unity is strictly a movement towards multiplicity where unity in directed towards nothingness is directed away from itself. Multiplicity occurs, where unity changes to multiplicity. The problem occurs, in that while there are multiple phenomenon, these multiple phenomenon are extensions of the one phenomenon. As extensions they exist through the one phenomenon as both self-maintained (through the one) and seperate (through the one).
The point exists as both one point and many points simultaneously and we are left with a dualism. The one and many, however as existing through eachother as eachother create a third nature of “synthesis” where the point as points through point(s) effectively join continually. This joining of both unity and multiplicity observes a base neutral element that is beyond both and is both.
And the cycle continues, where each point as existing through point effectively exists as a cycle.
The point as origin, line as seperation/connection and circle as maintainance exist as 1 in 3 and 3 in 1. This mirrors, Tesla’s basic foundations of energy, freqency and vibration.
The ten digit math system is not balanced.
Women aren’t balanced.
Anonymous1Thanks for taking the time to explain your position properly.
This conversation reminds me of the Physics professor I used to debate with back in my University days.
We will have to agree to disagree or we will be doing this forever.
I don’t believe in paradoxes and I think discussing them is a waste of time.
I don’t believe in Wave-Particle duality. The Double Slit Experiment can be interpreted differently when you understand Lines of Force and J.J. Thomson’s work. There is no need to create a paradoxical condition where a thing is both a wave and particle at the same time. The so called Photon is just a point of intersection between an Electric line of force and a Magnetic line of force.
I believe in an Electric and Magnetic explanation for all of the various problems of modern physics. I think it is silly to use a Paradox to explain an experimental result. I may as well be reading “Flatland” or better yet “Alice in Wonderland.”
No thank you, I will stay with my 19th Century Physics. Maxwell, Heaviside, Thomson, Tesla etc. The Physics that adheres to Logic and Reason and makes sense.
I’ll leave you with some quotes from Nikola Tesla:
“the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Boscovich, the great philosopher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boskovic dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum.
*BTW, I have read Boscovich’s work Tesla is correct about this. You would most certainly enjoy Boscovich’s work too.
“Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king… its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.”
“I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.”
Anonymous1Thanks for taking the time to explain your position properly.
This conversation reminds me of the Physics professor I used to debate with back in my University days.
We will have to agree to disagree or we will be doing this forever.
I don’t believe in paradoxes and I think discussing them is a waste of time.
I don’t believe in Wave-Particle duality. The Double Slit Experiment can be interpreted differently when you understand Lines of Force and J.J. Thomson’s work. There is no need to create a paradoxical condition where a thing is both a wave and particle at the same time. The so called Photon is just a point of intersection between an Electric line of force and a Magnetic line of force.
I believe in an Electric and Magnetic explanation for all of the various problems of modern physics. I think it is silly to use a Paradox to explain an experimental result. I may as well be reading “Flatland” or better yet “Alice in Wonderland.”
No thank you, I will stay with my 19th Century Physics. Maxwell, Heaviside, Thomson, Tesla etc. The Physics that adheres to Logic and Reason and makes sense.
I’ll leave you with some quotes from Nikola Tesla:
“the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Boscovich, the great philosopher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boskovic dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum.
*BTW, I have read Boscovich’s work Tesla is correct about this. You would most certainly enjoy Boscovich’s work too.
“Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king… its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.”
“I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.”
Anonymous1That last quote I posted from Tesla is often misrepresented by “Flat Earthers” so just to be clear about this. Tesla is talking about the Einstein Minkowski theory of Gravity, which requires “Space-Time” to be curved around Material objects.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
