Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #370504 > unrolled thread

Re: Where is the center of the universe?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 17:45 -0600
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-20 23:48 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:27 +0100
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 05:13 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 12:57 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:44 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:17 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:22 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-21 12:08 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-21 10:56 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 08:05 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-21 14:18 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:48 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:21 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-23 17:34 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 11:31 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 15:54 -0500
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-23 13:04 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 13:43 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 16:49 -0500
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 16:17 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 16:52 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:24 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 15:24 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:43 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-30 09:55 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-02 12:50 +0100
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-21 06:43 -0500
      Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:45 -0500
        Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". Edward Stansfield <stansfield5REM6@linuxmail.org> - 2015-11-21 14:11 -0500
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-21 20:37 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-21 21:06 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 11:43 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 09:01 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 14:59 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 07:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 16:00 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 08:18 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 17:50 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:38 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 14:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 23:07 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 16:22 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-23 22:09 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-23 15:15 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 12:01 +0000
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 04:52 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 14:33 +0000
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 07:05 -0800
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 15:23 +0000
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-24 16:30 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 14:02 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:32 -0600
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 22:52 +0000
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:51 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 17:07 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 14:21 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:14 +0000
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 16:27 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 01:50 +0000
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 18:18 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:44 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 07:53 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 12:39 +0000
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:48 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:47 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 10:32 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 03:03 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 09:47 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 23:31 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 19:28 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-11-25 21:37 -0700
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 23:52 +0100
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-01 21:52 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-11-26 00:36 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 01:33 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 21:36 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:22 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:27 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 00:48 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 17:34 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-26 23:49 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 04:39 -0800
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 04:54 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 05:11 -0800
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 06:02 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 16:08 +0100
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-28 17:51 +0100
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 00:20 +0100
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 11:10 +0100
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 11:45 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 13:01 +0100
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 04:55 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 14:33 +0100
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 06:24 -0800
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 15:50 +0100
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 07:06 -0800
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 16:11 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 04:56 -0800
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 05:48 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 06:16 -0800
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-30 22:50 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 16:27 -0800
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 07:51 +0100
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 23:09 -0800
                                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 08:31 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-12-01 00:15 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 09:59 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 11:16 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 11:02 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:07 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:16 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 17:37 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 18:47 +0100
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 18:11 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:06 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:04 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 23:09 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 17:50 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:01 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:05 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 12:42 -0800

Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

#370743

rickman wrote:
> 
> On 11/23/2015 2:31 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 12:48 PM, benj wrote:
> >>> Draw two normal lines to two separated points in our universe. Where they cross
> >>> is the center.
> >>
> >> You have claimed this several times. Apparently you don't understand that
> >> "normal to a point" has no meaning. In 3-D the concept "normal" applies TO A
> >> SURFACE, not to a point (or to a volume); in general the normal vector ("line")
> >> also depends on which point of the surface is used.
> >>
> >> What surface do you have in mind, why didn't you bother to mention it, and what
> >> make you think that the two lines will actually "cross"?
> >>
> >>          You seem to have an excessively naive notion of geometry in
> >>          your mind.
> >>
> >>> Sam represents the current idiocy of this theory. He says the universe has no
> >>> center. but also the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3 (Sam thinks
> >>> space-time is real so he calls time a dimension too making it 4) These two ideas
> >>> are totally mutually exclusive. Sam has no problem with that. You just never
> >>> think about both of them at the same time. Even better, don't think at all.
> >>
> >> You take issue with "Sam" without knowing the actual situation. He is by no
> >> means alone, and your claims here are simply due to your personal ignorance
> >> about basic geometry, about current cosmological models, and about other people.
> >>
> >> The best current cosmological model reproduces essentially all of the relevant
> >> details of the cosmos we observe. It has no "center of the universe", and models
> >> the geometry of the universe as a 4-dimensional spacetime manifold.
> >>
> >> Neither Sam nor cosmological models consider spacetime to be "real" (YOUR
> >> inappropriate word). Rather, spacetime is part of a MODEL of the world we
> >> inhabit; models based on it, SR and GR, are the best models we have today for
> >> the domains of the world in which they are valid. Mainstream cosmological models
> >> are based on GR (specifically the FLRW manifolds).
> >>
> >>          Your claim "the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3"
> >>          is confusing model and world -- that's invalid. You are
> >>          implicitly ASSUMING some unspecified cosmological model, and
> >>          the odds are incredibly high that it is not as good as the
> >>          mainstream cosmological models you take issue with.
> >>
> >>          IOW: arguing from ignorance is never a good plan. Basing your
> >>          argument on an unacknowledged and unspecified model is
> >>          downright silly. You don't even realize you are doing this.
> >>
> >> Tom Roberts
> >
> >
> > When you draw a line from the top of the universe..
> > to the bottom of the universe..that's one straight line.
> 
> If you are standing at the top of the universe and you look up, what do
> you see?
> 
> --
> 
> Rick


You may need to understand my perpective of the universe...and how I am
able to see the top of the universe.

When I am standing not at the top of the universe, but *on* top of the
universe...the whole universe, or
if I place the whole universe on my drawing board...then I draw a line
from the top of the universe to the
bottom of the universe. My view of the universe is like a sheet of paper
on the drawing board.

If I look up...I see a ceiling. If I look to the right I see venetian
blinds..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370744

On 11/23/2015 4:43 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>>
>> On 11/23/2015 2:31 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 12:48 PM, benj wrote:
>>>>> Draw two normal lines to two separated points in our universe. Where they cross
>>>>> is the center.
>>>>
>>>> You have claimed this several times. Apparently you don't understand that
>>>> "normal to a point" has no meaning. In 3-D the concept "normal" applies TO A
>>>> SURFACE, not to a point (or to a volume); in general the normal vector ("line")
>>>> also depends on which point of the surface is used.
>>>>
>>>> What surface do you have in mind, why didn't you bother to mention it, and what
>>>> make you think that the two lines will actually "cross"?
>>>>
>>>>           You seem to have an excessively naive notion of geometry in
>>>>           your mind.
>>>>
>>>>> Sam represents the current idiocy of this theory. He says the universe has no
>>>>> center. but also the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3 (Sam thinks
>>>>> space-time is real so he calls time a dimension too making it 4) These two ideas
>>>>> are totally mutually exclusive. Sam has no problem with that. You just never
>>>>> think about both of them at the same time. Even better, don't think at all.
>>>>
>>>> You take issue with "Sam" without knowing the actual situation. He is by no
>>>> means alone, and your claims here are simply due to your personal ignorance
>>>> about basic geometry, about current cosmological models, and about other people.
>>>>
>>>> The best current cosmological model reproduces essentially all of the relevant
>>>> details of the cosmos we observe. It has no "center of the universe", and models
>>>> the geometry of the universe as a 4-dimensional spacetime manifold.
>>>>
>>>> Neither Sam nor cosmological models consider spacetime to be "real" (YOUR
>>>> inappropriate word). Rather, spacetime is part of a MODEL of the world we
>>>> inhabit; models based on it, SR and GR, are the best models we have today for
>>>> the domains of the world in which they are valid. Mainstream cosmological models
>>>> are based on GR (specifically the FLRW manifolds).
>>>>
>>>>           Your claim "the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3"
>>>>           is confusing model and world -- that's invalid. You are
>>>>           implicitly ASSUMING some unspecified cosmological model, and
>>>>           the odds are incredibly high that it is not as good as the
>>>>           mainstream cosmological models you take issue with.
>>>>
>>>>           IOW: arguing from ignorance is never a good plan. Basing your
>>>>           argument on an unacknowledged and unspecified model is
>>>>           downright silly. You don't even realize you are doing this.
>>>>
>>>> Tom Roberts
>>>
>>>
>>> When you draw a line from the top of the universe..
>>> to the bottom of the universe..that's one straight line.
>>
>> If you are standing at the top of the universe and you look up, what do
>> you see?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>
>
> You may need to understand my perpective of the universe...and how I am
> able to see the top of the universe.
>
> When I am standing not at the top of the universe, but *on* top of the
> universe...the whole universe, or
> if I place the whole universe on my drawing board...then I draw a line
> from the top of the universe to the
> bottom of the universe. My view of the universe is like a sheet of paper
> on the drawing board.
>
> If I look up...I see a ceiling. If I look to the right I see venetian
> blinds..

Your universe is rather smaller than the one I know.  I guess it has 
different rules.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370755

rickman wrote:
> 
> On 11/23/2015 4:43 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > rickman wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/23/2015 2:31 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>> Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 12:48 PM, benj wrote:
> >>>>> Draw two normal lines to two separated points in our universe. Where they cross
> >>>>> is the center.
> >>>>
> >>>> You have claimed this several times. Apparently you don't understand that
> >>>> "normal to a point" has no meaning. In 3-D the concept "normal" applies TO A
> >>>> SURFACE, not to a point (or to a volume); in general the normal vector ("line")
> >>>> also depends on which point of the surface is used.
> >>>>
> >>>> What surface do you have in mind, why didn't you bother to mention it, and what
> >>>> make you think that the two lines will actually "cross"?
> >>>>
> >>>>           You seem to have an excessively naive notion of geometry in
> >>>>           your mind.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Sam represents the current idiocy of this theory. He says the universe has no
> >>>>> center. but also the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3 (Sam thinks
> >>>>> space-time is real so he calls time a dimension too making it 4) These two ideas
> >>>>> are totally mutually exclusive. Sam has no problem with that. You just never
> >>>>> think about both of them at the same time. Even better, don't think at all.
> >>>>
> >>>> You take issue with "Sam" without knowing the actual situation. He is by no
> >>>> means alone, and your claims here are simply due to your personal ignorance
> >>>> about basic geometry, about current cosmological models, and about other people.
> >>>>
> >>>> The best current cosmological model reproduces essentially all of the relevant
> >>>> details of the cosmos we observe. It has no "center of the universe", and models
> >>>> the geometry of the universe as a 4-dimensional spacetime manifold.
> >>>>
> >>>> Neither Sam nor cosmological models consider spacetime to be "real" (YOUR
> >>>> inappropriate word). Rather, spacetime is part of a MODEL of the world we
> >>>> inhabit; models based on it, SR and GR, are the best models we have today for
> >>>> the domains of the world in which they are valid. Mainstream cosmological models
> >>>> are based on GR (specifically the FLRW manifolds).
> >>>>
> >>>>           Your claim "the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3"
> >>>>           is confusing model and world -- that's invalid. You are
> >>>>           implicitly ASSUMING some unspecified cosmological model, and
> >>>>           the odds are incredibly high that it is not as good as the
> >>>>           mainstream cosmological models you take issue with.
> >>>>
> >>>>           IOW: arguing from ignorance is never a good plan. Basing your
> >>>>           argument on an unacknowledged and unspecified model is
> >>>>           downright silly. You don't even realize you are doing this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tom Roberts
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> When you draw a line from the top of the universe..
> >>> to the bottom of the universe..that's one straight line.
> >>
> >> If you are standing at the top of the universe and you look up, what do
> >> you see?
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Rick
> >
> >
> > You may need to understand my perpective of the universe...and how I am
> > able to see the top of the universe.
> >
> > When I am standing not at the top of the universe, but *on* top of the
> > universe...the whole universe, or
> > if I place the whole universe on my drawing board...then I draw a line
> > from the top of the universe to the
> > bottom of the universe. My view of the universe is like a sheet of paper
> > on the drawing board.
> >
> > If I look up...I see a ceiling. If I look to the right I see venetian
> > blinds..
> 
> Your universe is rather smaller than the one I know.  I guess it has
> different rules.
> 
> --
> 
> Rick



How big are photos and illustrations you see from others at NASA or from others in the 'scientific community'? Couldn't be bigger
than an 8x11.5 sheet of paper.

I see photos and illustrations in their books....their size is much smaller than mine.


Do I need to get a bigger drawing board??? 


Or I can take a picture with a camera....but I don't know the largest size I can print at Shutterfly.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370813

On 11/23/2015 3:54 PM, rickman wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 2:31 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>> Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 12:48 PM, benj wrote:
>>>> Draw two normal lines to two separated points in our universe. Where
>>>> they cross
>>>> is the center.
>>>
>>> You have claimed this several times. Apparently you don't understand
>>> that
>>> "normal to a point" has no meaning. In 3-D the concept "normal"
>>> applies TO A
>>> SURFACE, not to a point (or to a volume); in general the normal
>>> vector ("line")
>>> also depends on which point of the surface is used.
>>>
>>> What surface do you have in mind, why didn't you bother to mention
>>> it, and what
>>> make you think that the two lines will actually "cross"?
>>>
>>>          You seem to have an excessively naive notion of geometry in
>>>          your mind.
>>>
>>>> Sam represents the current idiocy of this theory. He says the
>>>> universe has no
>>>> center. but also the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3 (Sam
>>>> thinks
>>>> space-time is real so he calls time a dimension too making it 4)
>>>> These two ideas
>>>> are totally mutually exclusive. Sam has no problem with that. You
>>>> just never
>>>> think about both of them at the same time. Even better, don't think
>>>> at all.
>>>
>>> You take issue with "Sam" without knowing the actual situation. He is
>>> by no
>>> means alone, and your claims here are simply due to your personal
>>> ignorance
>>> about basic geometry, about current cosmological models, and about
>>> other people.
>>>
>>> The best current cosmological model reproduces essentially all of the
>>> relevant
>>> details of the cosmos we observe. It has no "center of the universe",
>>> and models
>>> the geometry of the universe as a 4-dimensional spacetime manifold.
>>>
>>> Neither Sam nor cosmological models consider spacetime to be "real"
>>> (YOUR
>>> inappropriate word). Rather, spacetime is part of a MODEL of the
>>> world we
>>> inhabit; models based on it, SR and GR, are the best models we have
>>> today for
>>> the domains of the world in which they are valid. Mainstream
>>> cosmological models
>>> are based on GR (specifically the FLRW manifolds).
>>>
>>>          Your claim "the universe is not multidimensional beyond 3"
>>>          is confusing model and world -- that's invalid. You are
>>>          implicitly ASSUMING some unspecified cosmological model, and
>>>          the odds are incredibly high that it is not as good as the
>>>          mainstream cosmological models you take issue with.
>>>
>>>          IOW: arguing from ignorance is never a good plan. Basing your
>>>          argument on an unacknowledged and unspecified model is
>>>          downright silly. You don't even realize you are doing this.
>>>
>>> Tom Roberts
>>
>>
>> When you draw a line from the top of the universe..
>> to the bottom of the universe..that's one straight line.
>
> If you are standing at the top of the universe and you look up, what do
> you see?

If you were a member of an ancient civilization living on a planet 
located in the oldest galaxy in the Cosmos did you have a better view of 
the "edge" of the Universe?

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370818

dvus wrote:

> If you were a member of an ancient civilization living on a planet
> located in the oldest galaxy in the Cosmos did you have a better view of
> the "edge" of the Universe?

No.
 
Stop crossposting without Followup-To, and get a real name.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: How many theoretical physicists specializing in general relativity
   does it take to change a light bulb?  
A: Two: one to hold the bulb and one to rotate the universe.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370826

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 10:24:05 PM UTC, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> dvus wrote:
> 
> > If you were a member of an ancient civilization living on a planet
> > located in the oldest galaxy in the Cosmos did you have a better view of
> > the "edge" of the Universe?
> 
> No.
>  
> Stop crossposting without Followup-To, and get a real name.
> 
> 
> PointedEars
> -- 
> Q: How many theoretical physicists specializing in general relativity
>    does it take to change a light bulb?  
> A: Two: one to hold the bulb and one to rotate the universe.
> (from: WolframAlpha)

hmm! this really isn't right you know!  for as I've had occasion to mention before, (several times in fact!), for the correct answer to the question as to how many general relativity theorists it takes to change a lightbulb, is not two, but five, since it needs four to take hold of one corner each of that big rubber sheet they unroll in order to demonstrate how space-time is warped by the presence of a large massive body, and then one more to bounce up and down in the middle until high enough to reach the light-fitting. 
ok? 
good!
(i did in fact send a message to wolframalpha pointing out this surprising error, yet for some inscrutable reason i have received no reply.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370829

underante wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> --
   ^^
>> Q: How many theoretical physicists specializing in general relativity
>>    does it take to change a light bulb?
>> A: Two: one to hold the bulb and one to rotate the universe.
>> (from: WolframAlpha)
> 
> hmm! this really isn't right you know!  for as I've had occasion to
> mention before, (several times in fact!), for the correct answer to the
> question as to how many general relativity theorists it takes to change a
> lightbulb, is not two, but five, […]

Oh for crying out loud, will you please use your brain before you post?  It 
is a *random* *signature*, and it is a *scientific* *joke*.  Finally got it?

And no, two physicists will suffice.  To “rotate the universe” means to 
define a frame of reference in which the light bulb does not move but that 
rotates relative to the frame of reference of the physicist holding the 
light bulb.  As all frames of reference are equal, that is equivalent to a 
physicist that turns around while holding the light bulb.

By contrast, your rubber sheet story is well beside the point, and not even 
funny.  Stop it.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the nuclear physicist order for lunch?  
A: Fission chips.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371133

On 11/24/2015 5:24 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> dvus wrote:
>
>> If you were a member of an ancient civilization living on a planet
>> located in the oldest galaxy in the Cosmos did you have a better view of
>> the "edge" of the Universe?
>
> No.
>
> Stop crossposting without Followup-To, and get a real name.

Am I the only one you chide about what you believe Usenet policy to be?

Why do you put the .sig delimiter after your .sig?

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371293

dvus wrote:

> On 11/24/2015 5:24 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> dvus wrote:
>>> If you were a member of an ancient civilization living on a planet
>>> located in the oldest galaxy in the Cosmos did you have a better view of
>>> the "edge" of the Universe?
>> No.
>> Stop crossposting without Followup-To, and get a real name.
> 
> Am I the only one you chide about what you believe Usenet policy to be?

Good customs, sometimes even specified standards.  And no, you are not the 
only newbie to whom I give such helpful advice, investing my precious free 
time.

> Why do you put the .sig delimiter after your .sig?

Because in this newsgroup the signature is randomly chosen, and often four 
lines long already.


F'up2 poster

PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370528

On 11/20/2015 6:45 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 2/8/15 3:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

>> Where is the center of the universe?
>>
>
>    No Center
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html
>
>    Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html
>
>    WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
>      http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html
>
>    WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
>      http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html

I'm having a hard time with this. If there is no "center" of the 
Universe then it would seem that it would have to be infinite in size. 
Yet we are told the BB happened just under 13.75 light-years ago. How 
could it be infinite if it originated a finite time ago?

Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that 
cosmologists are now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after 
the BB. What will they see when they are able to see beyond those 
earliest galaxies?

Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe shaped 
kind of like a football. (why it isn't round I don't know) Those 
diagrams don't indicate the Universe is infinite or they would have to 
be be infinitely big.

Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble 
Universes surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?

I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject but I 
still can't seem to wrap my mind around the seemingly contradictory 
facts I see here and elsewhere. My intuition says it all must have 
something to do with c and its limitations on what we can see but I 
guess I would need a better understanding of the math of time dilation 
for it to make sense.

Heh, I'm hesitating hitting the "Send" button for fear of appearing a 
moron but I guess if I don't ask I'll never know if indeed I *can* know. 
So, here goes...

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370550 — Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang".

On 11/21/2015 08:43 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
> @dvus,  The _observable_ Universe (capital 'U') is finite.
>
> The _horizon_ is subjective, it depends on when/where you are.
>
> For us, here&now, the _horizon_ is 46 billion light years away
> and running away from us at an accelerated rate.
>
> Entropy changes the SpaceTime metric ( per General Relativity ),
> the Universe is expanding, exponentially, per GR's cosmological constant.
>
>    "Dark Energy" is just entropy ratcheting up
>    as "exergy" (energy that can do work) is consumed away.
>
>    "Dark Matter" is just unseen "rest mass".
>
>    Like bullets, photons have momentum (but no rest mass).
>
> Objectively,
> There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang".
>
>
Rolf, my BBB theory says the Big Bang is Bullshit.

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370559 — Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang".

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:45:24 -0500, benj wrote:

> On 11/21/2015 08:43 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>>
>> @dvus,  The _observable_ Universe (capital 'U') is finite.
>>
>> The _horizon_ is subjective, it depends on when/where you are.
>>
>> For us, here&now, the _horizon_ is 46 billion light years away
>> and running away from us at an accelerated rate.
>>
>> Entropy changes the SpaceTime metric ( per General Relativity ),
>> the Universe is expanding, exponentially, per GR's cosmological constant.
>>
>>    "Dark Energy" is just entropy ratcheting up
>>    as "exergy" (energy that can do work) is consumed away.
>>
>>    "Dark Matter" is just unseen "rest mass".
>>
>>    Like bullets, photons have momentum (but no rest mass).
>>
>> Objectively,
>> There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang".
>>
>>
> Rolf, my BBB theory says the Big Bang is Bullshit.

Where did the first one come from?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370565

dvus wrote:

> On 11/20/2015 6:45 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> On 2/8/15 3:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> Where is the center of the universe?
>>
>>    No Center
>>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
>>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html
>> […]
> I'm having a hard time with this.

You are not alone.  But that does not mean that it cannot be true.

> If there is no "center" of the Universe then it would seem that it would
> have to be infinite in size.

No.  <https://youtu.be/-EilZ4VY5Vs?t=545>

> Yet we are told the BB happened just under 13.75 light-years ago.

Whoever told you this has no clue what they are talking about, although it 
is very likely that you did not listen carefully.

The current best fit of the age of the universe, by the Planck collaboration 
in 2013, and even when combined with WMAP results, is ca. 1.38 × 10¹⁰ (13.8 
_billion_, short scale) _years_.  [Light-years is a unit of length, not of 
time.  The current size (diameter) of the *observable* universe is ca. 
9.3 × 10¹⁰ (93 billion) light-years.  For yet unexplained reasons the 
expansion speed of the universe has been and still is increasing.]

> How could it be infinite if it originated a finite time ago?

Ex falso quodlibet.  However, nobody said that the universe was infinite in 
size.
 
> Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that
> cosmologists are now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after
> the BB.

What you have read is correct.

> What will they see when they are able to see beyond those earliest 
> galaxies?

They are not going to be able to see beyond.  A hot plasma is opaque to 
electromagnetic radiation.  However, if other ways of observation are found 
(like gravitational waves), then current knowledge (quantum mechanics) 
suggests that no events that happened before the Planck epoch can be 
observed.  There was no time yet then.
 
> Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe shaped
> kind of like a football.

Where?

> (why it isn't round I don't know)

Nobody knows why, but we are sure that it is not round like a ball.  If it 
were round like a ball, i.e. closed, large triangles like those to the CMB 
would not have an inner angle sum of approximately 180°.  See the surface of 
Earth for an example of a closed space: a proper triangle from a pole to the 
equator, then along the equator and back to the same pole always has an 
inner angle sum that is greater than 180° as you already have two right 
hangles (90°) at the equator.

<https://youtu.be/-EilZ4VY5Vs?t=1935>

(I can highly recommend the entire talk.)

> Those diagrams don't indicate the Universe is infinite or they would have
> to be be infinitely big.

Good.
 
> Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble
> Universes surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?

Again, nobody except you said that the universe were infinite in size.
The size of the universe still is an open question.

> I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject […]

Try harder.  A simple Google search returns a lot of pertinent information, 
and Wikipedia has a lot of good articles on the subject.

Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using 
your real name.


F'up2 sci.physics.relativity

PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370588

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> 
> dvus wrote:
> 
> > On 11/20/2015 6:45 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> >>> On 2/8/15 3:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>> Where is the center of the universe?
> >>
> >>    No Center
> >>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
> >>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html
> >> […]
> > I'm having a hard time with this.
> 
> You are not alone.  But that does not mean that it cannot be true.
> 
> > If there is no "center" of the Universe then it would seem that it would
> > have to be infinite in size.
> 
> No.  <https://youtu.be/-EilZ4VY5Vs?t=545>
> 
> > Yet we are told the BB happened just under 13.75 light-years ago.
> 
> Whoever told you this has no clue what they are talking about, although it
> is very likely that you did not listen carefully.
> 
> The current best fit of the age of the universe, by the Planck collaboration
> in 2013, and even when combined with WMAP results, is ca. 1.38 × 10¹⁰ (13.8
> _billion_, short scale) _years_.  [Light-years is a unit of length, not of
> time.  The current size (diameter) of the *observable* universe is ca.
> 9.3 × 10¹⁰ (93 billion) light-years.  For yet unexplained reasons the
> expansion speed of the universe has been and still is increasing.]
> 
> > How could it be infinite if it originated a finite time ago?
> 
> Ex falso quodlibet.  However, nobody said that the universe was infinite in
> size.
> 
> > Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that
> > cosmologists are now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after
> > the BB.
> 
> What you have read is correct.
> 
> > What will they see when they are able to see beyond those earliest
> > galaxies?
> 
> They are not going to be able to see beyond.  A hot plasma is opaque to
> electromagnetic radiation.  However, if other ways of observation are found
> (like gravitational waves), then current knowledge (quantum mechanics)
> suggests that no events that happened before the Planck epoch can be
> observed.  There was no time yet then.
> 
> > Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe shaped
> > kind of like a football.
> 
> Where?
> 
> > (why it isn't round I don't know)
> 
> Nobody knows why, but we are sure that it is not round like a ball.  If it
> were round like a ball, i.e. closed, large triangles like those to the CMB
> would not have an inner angle sum of approximately 180°.  See the surface of
> Earth for an example of a closed space: a proper triangle from a pole to the
> equator, then along the equator and back to the same pole always has an
> inner angle sum that is greater than 180° as you already have two right
> hangles (90°) at the equator.
> 
> <https://youtu.be/-EilZ4VY5Vs?t=1935>
> 
> (I can highly recommend the entire talk.)
> 
> > Those diagrams don't indicate the Universe is infinite or they would have
> > to be be infinitely big.
> 
> Good.
> 
> > Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble
> > Universes surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?
> 
> Again, nobody except you said that the universe were infinite in size.
> The size of the universe still is an open question.
> 
> > I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject […]
> 
> Try harder.  A simple Google search returns a lot of pertinent information,
> and Wikipedia has a lot of good articles on the subject.
> 
> Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using
> your real name.

What if his real name is PointedLips? 


> 
> F'up2 sci.physics.relativity
> 
> PointedEars
> --
> Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?
> A: To a prism.
> 
> (from: WolframAlpha)





Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see the edge?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370604

The Starmaker wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using
>> your real name.
> 
> What if his real name is PointedLips?

Then he must have had really cruel parents.

Which part of “stop crossposting without Followup-To set” did you not 
understand, again crossposting without Followup-To across three newsgroups?

> Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see the
> edge?

Your logic is flawed: It presupposes that there is a God, that they created 
the universe, and that their perception would be like that of humans.  That 
way lies madness, not science.  F'up2 alt.religion.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370615

On 11/22/2015 06:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using
>>> your real name.
>>
>> What if his real name is PointedLips?
>
> Then he must have had really cruel parents.
>
> Which part of “stop crossposting without Followup-To set” did you not
> understand, again crossposting without Followup-To across three newsgroups?

If you wish to act as moderator of this group you must first get 
permission from HVAC. I trust it never occurred to you that it might be 
useful to have a interdisciplinary discussion of these issues?

Like most people who think math is reality, you much overestimate your 
own value. We are not impressed with your arrogance.

>> Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see the
>> edge?
>
> Your logic is flawed: It presupposes that there is a God, that they created
> the universe, and that their perception would be like that of humans.  That
> way lies madness, not science.  F'up2 alt.religion.

Since we can define "God" as the entire universe, everything in it and 
that laws that govern it, that means that even you following your 
atheist religion can merely substitute "random chance" for "God". (Even 
though Rolf will tell you nothing "random" or "chance" exists.

Perhaps if you left your tower of total mathematical fantasy for a while 
and joined us in the real world you might learn something.

Followups restored to group discussion (Yes, Starfaker is a moron, but 
so are you)



> PointedEars
>


-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370622

benj wrote:

> On 11/22/2015 06:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Which part of “stop crossposting without Followup-To set” did you not
>> understand, again crossposting without Followup-To across three
>> newsgroups?
> 
> If you wish to act as moderator of this group

Iff I wished.  I do not.  It was a request made, by an ordinary netizen so 
to speak, to further avoid making newsgroups less usable.

> you must first get permission from HVAC.

No, I do not need to do that.  How did you get that idea?  None of the 
newsgroups that I had to crosspost to (because others did, and there were no 
more than three newsgroups) or set Followup-To is moderated (the newsgroup 
Followup-To was set to would be irrelevant anyway; it is the person 
following the Followup-To that would be responsible for adhering to a 
moderated newsgroup’s rules).  And I seriously doubt that a newsgroup 
moderator could get elected without a real name; “HVAC” is not a real name.

> I trust it never occurred to you that it might be
> useful to have a interdisciplinary discussion of these issues?

It can be useful, however then the *appropriate* newsgroups should be 
included, like one on philosophy and one on religion, and Followup-To should 
be set to the newsgroup that fits the subject of the discussion best.  The 
question what a hypothetical being called “God” could or could not see has 
nothing to do with science, nothing with either astronomy or physics.  Yet, 
it was crossposted to alt.astronomy, sci.physics, and sci.physics.relativity 
(which is in itself unwise, as alt.ALL follows different rules than the 
Big 8.)
 
> Like most people who think math is reality,

I do not think that math is reality insofar as that it would define reality.
I think, however, that math can be used to describe reality and predict the 
future to some extent.  Because that is precisely what physics does: if I 
know where a particle was and I know its velocity (the time-derivative of 
its position), I can predict where and when, assuming no further 
interference, it is going to be.

> you much overestimate your own value.

You overestimate your understanding of the universe, including your 
understanding of me.

> We are not impressed with your arrogance.

And who are you to speak for everyone?  Is that not a clear sign that *you* 
“overestimate your own value”, that you display “arrogance”?
 
> Since we can define "God" as the entire universe, […]

We can also define “hutzliputzli” as the grind in your nose, but neither 
definition is particularly useful.

In fact, a being called “God” that *is* the entire universe is a concept of 
pantheism which is alien to Christianity, the religious school that has been 
referred to: In Christianity, the belief is instead that the “God” *created* 
the universe (for humans); “God” therefore is an entity separate from the 
universe there.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the female magnet say to the male magnet?  
A: From the back, I found you repulsive, but from the front
   I find myself very attracted to you.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370626

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:59:59 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the 
> universe there.
> 
> PointedEars

This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to what
the Bible says.

Gary

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370629

Gary Harnagel wrote:

>> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
>> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the
>> universe there.
> 
> This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to what
> the Bible says.

Sounds fascinating, let's hear.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370635

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:00:47 AM UTC-7, Walter Ilinois wrote:
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> 
> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the
> >> universe there.
> > 
> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to what
> > the Bible says.
> 
> Sounds fascinating, let's hear.

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web