Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #526497 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-10-16 19:26 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-11-02 12:22 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 182 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 19:26 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-16 20:44 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-17 15:14 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 22:18 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 22:21 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 22:34 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 09:26 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 10:34 -0700
Why is/isn't the cosmological constant's value a "real" mathematical infinitesimal? was Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 14:55 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? richard@microscitech.com - 2015-10-18 13:28 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 13:36 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-18 15:17 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 15:50 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 16:33 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 19:20 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-18 22:37 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 22:58 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 23:05 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 23:15 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 10:49 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 11:09 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-10-17 12:03 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-10-17 12:26 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 04:45 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 14:32 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:03 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 09:55 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:11 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:27 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:30 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:54 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:58 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 11:45 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 14:01 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 13:32 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 14:15 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:02 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:08 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:24 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:29 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:25 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:47 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:55 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-19 11:35 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 13:49 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-20 07:10 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 09:58 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 12:32 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 16:55 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 21:06 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 21:40 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 00:03 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-21 01:12 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 02:42 -0700
The Cosmological Constant is a real mathematical infinitesimal, Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 17:37 -0700
free space w/ atoms therof noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 17:27 -0700
Re: free space w/ atoms therof "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 17:46 -0700
Re: free space w/ atoms therof "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 18:23 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-21 19:58 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 20:27 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-21 21:51 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-21 22:02 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 23:10 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 12:32 -0700
ask why, that noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 13:03 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-22 13:20 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 14:47 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 14:55 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 16:56 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 15:10 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 19:08 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 22:57 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 08:57 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 08:23 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 10:44 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 08:54 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 11:01 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 09:12 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-23 11:52 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 12:17 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-23 22:56 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 23:35 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-24 22:43 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-25 14:03 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-25 15:17 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 10:40 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 11:00 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 13:43 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 14:44 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 15:05 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 17:35 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 17:38 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 18:27 -0800
Universe is curved locally, seems flat over teraparsecs noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 18:40 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 19:51 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 20:03 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 20:26 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 20:34 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 20:42 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 21:00 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 05:42 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:01 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:16 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:24 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-27 14:26 -0800
inside & outside of cell noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 17:11 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 19:36 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 15:44 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-28 23:07 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-28 23:43 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-28 23:46 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 00:08 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 00:13 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 10:26 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 10:37 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 10:51 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-29 10:59 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 06:17 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 06:30 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 08:33 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-31 11:58 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 12:01 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-31 13:20 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 15:24 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-31 15:02 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 15:37 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 15:59 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 15:25 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 14:41 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 16:04 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-31 20:47 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 21:02 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 07:38 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-01 15:08 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 15:38 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 23:02 -0400
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 20:22 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-31 20:40 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 20:58 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 07:43 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 10:38 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 12:55 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 11:02 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? Jeffrey Bannister <jban48@pannelcamarena.org> - 2015-11-01 19:15 +0000
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 13:22 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-01 15:07 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 15:34 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-01 16:18 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 17:08 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-01 23:10 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-01 23:19 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 07:46 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 07:40 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 07:42 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 07:40 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 11:00 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 14:29 -0800
Universe is not locally flatwise noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 18:49 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 12:21 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-27 14:33 -0800
Re: Why is the universe flat? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 14:47 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 18:10 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-26 23:54 -0800
on, re noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:16 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:55 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-10-23 14:00 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 14:42 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-24 19:12 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 03:12 -0400
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 13:08 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-10-18 15:10 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 13:56 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 12:49 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 13:50 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2015-10-17 16:45 -0500
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 12:39 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-10-19 14:23 -0700
theodolites noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 19:13 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 10:17 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-10-24 15:05 -0700
Re: Why is the universe flat? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 10:23 -0600
Re: Why is the universe flat? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 12:22 -0800
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 11:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <56351D7D.4DA4@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529410 |
Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 12:11:47 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > noTthaTguY wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > > > Do you think you can translate that for people who live in the ....real > > > > > world? > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > can you tranlate it to pictures or video > > > > without using symbols...another form > > > > of communication instead of math? > > > > > > or maybe "just" using "words" in "english"? > > > > > > In other words... > > > > can you connect this: > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > to the real world? And translate into english?? > > A triangle is defined by three sides, > or, three angles and one side. > > This is a statement of the resource terms > of representations. > > "Measuring the area of a triangle" is a > usual feature of a geometry. Who said anything by a "triangle"?? In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra or tetrahedrons) is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, six straight edges, and four vertex corners. ain't you missing one side, (or was you cutting classes that day?)? It's the end of the road for you, isn't it? and btw, this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinitysium is just an ...assumption.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 12:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <58480c77-eefc-4efa-8b73-06c0f0af93b0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529464 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 11:58:50 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 12:11:47 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > noTthaTguY wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think you can translate that for people who live in the ....real > > > > > > world? > > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > can you tranlate it to pictures or video > > > > > without using symbols...another form > > > > > of communication instead of math? > > > > > > > > or maybe "just" using "words" in "english"? > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > > can you connect this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > to the real world? And translate into english?? > > > > A triangle is defined by three sides, > > or, three angles and one side. > > > > This is a statement of the resource terms > > of representations. > > > > "Measuring the area of a triangle" is a > > usual feature of a geometry. > > > > Who said anything by a "triangle"?? > > > In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra or tetrahedrons) is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, six straight edges, and four vertex corners. > > > > > ain't you missing one side, (or was you cutting classes that day?)? > > > > It's the end of the road for you, isn't it? > > > > and btw, this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinitysium is just an ...assumption. No, that the universe is infinite is courtesy deductive inference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 13:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <563530B8.6844@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529465 |
Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 11:58:50 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 12:11:47 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > noTthaTguY wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think you can translate that for people who live in the ....real > > > > > > > world? > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > > can you tranlate it to pictures or video > > > > > > without using symbols...another form > > > > > > of communication instead of math? > > > > > > > > > > or maybe "just" using "words" in "english"? > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > > > > can you connect this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > to the real world? And translate into english?? > > > > > > A triangle is defined by three sides, > > > or, three angles and one side. > > > > > > This is a statement of the resource terms > > > of representations. > > > > > > "Measuring the area of a triangle" is a > > > usual feature of a geometry. > > > > > > > > Who said anything by a "triangle"?? > > > > > > In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra or tetrahedrons) is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, six straight edges, and four vertex corners. > > > > > > > > > > ain't you missing one side, (or was you cutting classes that day?)? > > > > > > > > It's the end of the road for you, isn't it? > > > > > > > > and btw, this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinitysium is just an ...assumption. > > No, that the universe is infinite > is courtesy deductive inference. It's the same thing. a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof. https://www.google.com/#q=define+assumption "if the premises are true,..." https://www.google.com/#q=define+deductive+inference a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion. "if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true" https://www.google.com/#q=define+premise synonyms: "premise" supposition, presumption, belief, expectation, conjecture, speculation, surmise, guess, "premise", hypothesis; https://www.google.com/#q=define+assumption "IF" https://www.google.com/#q=define+if So, I repeat: this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinite is just an ...assumption. the theory of space and time is ...just a theory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 15:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ee6dnbZyeIkNvqjLnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #529505 |
On 10/31/15 4:20 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > the theory of space and time is ...just a theory. Perhaps a refresher: Why is the universe flat? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > Problem and the Flatness Problem. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 15:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <56354882.10BC@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529507 |
Sam Wormley wrote: > > On 10/31/15 4:20 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > the theory of space and time is ...just a theory. > > Perhaps a refresher: > > Why is the universe flat? > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > "to answer"?? No, not to answer....to figure out how to plug up the holes. a fix...a bandage.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6a3c8d90-da65-474b-bf4a-380f3aa58570@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529543 |
Cosmic inflation is a logical impossibility.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 15:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8cf3ebf1-ca5e-4df4-9347-05c75ffa131b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529505 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:20:50 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 11:58:50 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 12:11:47 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > noTthaTguY wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think you can translate that for people who live in the ....real > > > > > > > > world? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > > > can you tranlate it to pictures or video > > > > > > > without using symbols...another form > > > > > > > of communication instead of math? > > > > > > > > > > > > or maybe "just" using "words" in "english"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words... > > > > > > > > > > can you connect this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the main elements are planes and lines, > > > > > > > > > which are dual in space, and vertices and cells, > > > > > > > > > like wise. hte infinite net of hexahedra is autodual, > > > > > > > > > just as is the tetrahedron > > > > > > > > > > to the real world? And translate into english?? > > > > > > > > A triangle is defined by three sides, > > > > or, three angles and one side. > > > > > > > > This is a statement of the resource terms > > > > of representations. > > > > > > > > "Measuring the area of a triangle" is a > > > > usual feature of a geometry. > > > > > > > > > > > > Who said anything by a "triangle"?? > > > > > > > > > In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra or tetrahedrons) is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, six straight edges, and four vertex corners. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ain't you missing one side, (or was you cutting classes that day?)? > > > > > > > > > > > > It's the end of the road for you, isn't it? > > > > > > > > > > > > and btw, this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinitysium is just an ...assumption. > > > > No, that the universe is infinite > > is courtesy deductive inference. > > > It's the same thing. > > a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof. > https://www.google.com/#q=define+assumption > > > "if the premises are true,..." > https://www.google.com/#q=define+deductive+inference > > a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or > follows as a conclusion. > "if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true" > https://www.google.com/#q=define+premise > > > > synonyms: "premise" supposition, presumption, belief, expectation, > conjecture, speculation, surmise, guess, "premise", hypothesis; > https://www.google.com/#q=define+assumption > > > > "IF" > > > https://www.google.com/#q=define+if > > > > So, I repeat: this idea that the universe/space/time is..infinite is > just an ...assumption. > > > > the theory of space and time is ...just a theory. No, if the universe was finite, all the reference frames would be one reference frame. That is a general outline as to why it _is_ infinite (and not just unbounded as to light over time). Basically it would be a contradiction for the universe to not be infinite. (This also has for MWI that one of the MWI "Universe"'s is sole, back to SWI or a Universe.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 15:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ee6dnbFyeIkkvqjLnZ2dnUU7-WUAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #529465 |
On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > No, that the universe is infinite > is courtesy deductive inference. Perhaps a refresher: Why is the universe flat? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > Problem and the Flatness Problem. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 14:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5582ce0c-ecae-414f-89c9-321d81df9526@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529508 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > No, that the universe is infinite > > is courtesy deductive inference. > > Perhaps a refresher: > > Why is the universe flat? > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > > > > -- > > sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated > to the discussion of physics, news from the physics > community, and physics-related social issues. The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 16:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5b49359f-ccf2-41ad-9d54-73ff5c9177da@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529540 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 2:42:02 PM UTC-7, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > > On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > No, that the universe is infinite > > > is courtesy deductive inference. > > > > Perhaps a refresher: > > > > Why is the universe flat? > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > > > > > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > > > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert Expansion can be seen as an experimental effect. The farther you look, the more there is, the closer you look, the smaller things are. Still, there is besides the astronomical / cosmological measurements the simple expansion of light's travel over time, again this has to be balanced with, for example, that galaxy distribution is uniform (no apparent origin of the Universe / the Universe and its origin is everywhere). So, light's travel over time, since the Big Bang then as regards to heat and cold death or entropy, (or the gradient), still sees that space is pretty much isotropic in the large and the uniform and the regular. Again, this is opinion, neatly a theoretical opinion, for a theoretical mathematical physics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 20:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <56359979.2036@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529552 |
Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 2:42:02 PM UTC-7, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > > > On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > No, that the universe is infinite > > > > is courtesy deductive inference. > > > > > > Perhaps a refresher: > > > > > > Why is the universe flat? > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > > > > > > > > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > > > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > > > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > > > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > > > > > > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert > > Expansion can be seen as an experimental effect. > > The farther you look, the more there is, > the closer you look, the smaller things are. the smaller things are, the closer you look.. and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is in the smaller things there are. The more things there are, the closer you look.. and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is in the smaller things. > > Still, there is besides the astronomical / > cosmological measurements the simple expansion > of light's travel over time, again this has to > be balanced with, for example, that galaxy > distribution is uniform (no apparent origin of > the Universe / the Universe and its origin is > everywhere). > > So, light's travel over time, since the Big Bang > then as regards to heat and cold death or entropy, > (or the gradient), still sees that space is > pretty much isotropic in the large and the uniform > and the regular. > > Again, this is opinion, neatly a theoretical > opinion, for a theoretical mathematical physics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 21:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f8b91f82-0418-4373-977d-1521e0d13212@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529620 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 8:47:42 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 2:42:02 PM UTC-7, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > > > > On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > > No, that the universe is infinite > > > > > is courtesy deductive inference. > > > > > > > > Perhaps a refresher: > > > > > > > > Why is the universe flat? > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > > > > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > > > > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > > > > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > > > > > > > > > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert > > > > Expansion can be seen as an experimental effect. > > > > The farther you look, the more there is, > > the closer you look, the smaller things are. > > > the smaller things are, the closer you look.. > and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is > in the smaller things there are. > > The more things there are, the closer you look.. > and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is > in the smaller things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Still, there is besides the astronomical / > > cosmological measurements the simple expansion > > of light's travel over time, again this has to > > be balanced with, for example, that galaxy > > distribution is uniform (no apparent origin of > > the Universe / the Universe and its origin is > > everywhere). > > > > So, light's travel over time, since the Big Bang > > then as regards to heat and cold death or entropy, > > (or the gradient), still sees that space is > > pretty much isotropic in the large and the uniform > > and the regular. > > > > Again, this is opinion, neatly a theoretical > > opinion, for a theoretical mathematical physics. https://www.google.com/#q=NIST+CODATA Look more closely!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 07:38 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <782dneWkEqkniKvLnZ2dnUU7-SudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #529620 |
On 10/31/15 11:47 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > the smaller things are, the closer you look.. > and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is > in the smaller things there are. Nope -- measurements of size are independent of how you are looking at an object (not moving in your reference frame). -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 15:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <56369B87.5764@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529677 |
Sam Wormley wrote: > > On 10/31/15 11:47 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > the smaller things are, the closer you look.. > > and the farther you look ...closer, the more there is > > in the smaller things there are. > > Nope -- measurements of size are independent of how you are > looking at an object (not moving in your reference frame). > I wasn't talking about objects... I was talking about information contained in space.. a small area of space.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 15:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <34369f5a-709d-42fd-a657-e9199f6e6e65@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529791 |
Information is scalable
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 23:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5hfZx.10104$ma6.737@fx18.iad> |
| In reply to | #529540 |
On 10/31/2015 05:41 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>>> No, that the universe is infinite
>>> is courtesy deductive inference.
>>
>> Perhaps a refresher:
>>
>> Why is the universe flat?
>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA
>>
>>
>> > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by
>> > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental
>> > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon
>> > Problem and the Flatness Problem.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
>> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
>> community, and physics-related social issues.
>
> The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert
>
Sad that it's all bullshit and you are too dumb to know otherwise.
Wormley has trained you well. Parrot!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 20:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a2eb16d-6833-45d4-85c3-622084252b6c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529610 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 8:02:29 PM UTC-7, benj wrote: > On 10/31/2015 05:41 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > >> On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > >>> No, that the universe is infinite > >>> is courtesy deductive inference. > >> > >> Perhaps a refresher: > >> > >> Why is the universe flat? > >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > >> > >> > >> > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > >> > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > >> > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > >> > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > >> > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert > > > Sad that it's all bullshit and you are too dumb to know otherwise. > Wormley has trained you well. Parrot! > Don't worry. If it's useless to physics, it will just fall out. That's also a nice thing about numbers. They do what they do automatically. We got Einstein over here too, and he says the Universe is infinite or you're stupid. I wouldn't insult your intelligence. I'll let intelligence do it!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 20:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <563597C8.15AF@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #529615 |
Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 8:02:29 PM UTC-7, benj wrote: > > On 10/31/2015 05:41 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > > >> On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > >>> No, that the universe is infinite > > >>> is courtesy deductive inference. > > >> > > >> Perhaps a refresher: > > >> > > >> Why is the universe flat? > > >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > >> > > >> > > >> > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > >> > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > >> > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > >> > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > >> > > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert > > > > > Sad that it's all bullshit and you are too dumb to know otherwise. > > Wormley has trained you well. Parrot! > > > > Don't worry. If it's useless to physics, > it will just fall out. > > That's also a nice thing about numbers. > They do what they do automatically. > > We got Einstein over here too, and he > says the Universe is infinite or you're > stupid. But Einstein says the Universe is infinite based on...his theory, which hasn't been proven, it's just his assumption. maybe "infinite" is a coverup. Something Einstein came up with to fix something else...he probably simply...changed the facts to fit his theory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-31 20:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6ac0f852-9ed5-46a1-b594-05c821d4b27e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #529619 |
On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 8:40:29 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 8:02:29 PM UTC-7, benj wrote: > > > On 10/31/2015 05:41 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote: > > > >> On 10/31/15 2:01 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > > > >>> No, that the universe is infinite > > > >>> is courtesy deductive inference. > > > >> > > > >> Perhaps a refresher: > > > >> > > > >> Why is the universe flat? > > > >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsOWtxKKA > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Cosmic inflation is a theory that was proposed in the 1980s by > > > >> > cosmologist Alan Guth to answer some of the most fundamental > > > >> > questions of the origins of our universe. It also solved the Horizon > > > >> > Problem and the Flatness Problem. > > > >> > > > > The universe seems infinite to us because its so big,and getting bigger at am accelerating rate.Its inflating however that makes it finite.Sad but reality. TreBert > > > > > > > Sad that it's all bullshit and you are too dumb to know otherwise. > > > Wormley has trained you well. Parrot! > > > > > > > Don't worry. If it's useless to physics, > > it will just fall out. > > > > That's also a nice thing about numbers. > > They do what they do automatically. > > > > We got Einstein over here too, and he > > says the Universe is infinite or you're > > stupid. > > > But Einstein says the Universe is infinite based on...his theory, which > hasn't been proven, it's just his assumption. > > > maybe "infinite" is a coverup. > > Something Einstein came up with to fix something else...he probably > simply...changed the facts to fit his theory. I got an answer for ya! Time goes back forever, Space goes on forever. If I have a point here it's this: Einstein with the cosmological constant, and Planck with Planck's c and C, have those those for placeholders for that Planck's c and Einstein's cosmological constant are greater than zero and less than any fixed value. Their value is an infinitesimal, and the real infinitesimals exist as the total partitioning of their range. This exactly fits with the usual role of the infinitesimal in the usual role of the differential of the integral calculus. Also: there are features for effect of the infinitesimals, that discretization doubles the point width. Where you accept that's Einstein's formula, and, that "constant" exists in all interpretations of that, then to correlate and combine the effects of the large and small, will see that introduction of a proper mathematical foundation with the real with their own infinitesimals, automatically equips the existing theory with new features in effect. It's not not an infinitesimal. So, just as here Guth's is a re-sweeping accommodation of the big telescope in the large (and there are other Guth's), it's not final in the hysterisis of jumping over again the "constant's" value, but of all the resulting framework to accommodate each: that it's larger than zero and less than a fixed scalar value. I built a logic and a mathematics and a geometry for this that is simply discovered by anybody.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 07:43 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <782dneakEqlki6vLnZ2dnUU7-SudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #529622 |
On 10/31/15 10:58 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > Time goes back forever, > Space goes on forever. Have you any empirical evidence for that claim? -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web