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

Groups > sci.physics > #578490 > unrolled thread

Space-Time and Surrealism

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Space-Time and Surrealism "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-16 17:51 -0700
    Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-05-17 09:54 +0200
      Re: Space-Time and Surrealism jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-17 01:09 -0700
      Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-05-17 12:19 +0200
        Re: Space-Time and Surrealism jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-17 04:56 -0700
          Re: Space-Time and Surrealism Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 05:30 -0700
            Re: Space-Time and Surrealism john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 06:49 -0700
              Re: Space-Time and Surrealism HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 07:01 -0700
                Re: Space-Time and Surrealism john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 07:06 -0700
                  Re: Space-Time and Surrealism Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-18 04:46 -0700
        Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-17 11:40 -0700
      Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-17 11:41 -0700
    Re: Space-Time and Surrealism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-05-17 23:13 -0700
      Re: Space-Time and Surrealism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-05-17 23:26 -0700
        Re: Space-Time and Surrealism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-05-17 23:32 -0700
          Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 01:31 -0700
      Re: Space-Time and Surrealism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-05-18 11:31 -0700
        Re: Space-Time and Surrealism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-05-19 09:53 -0700
          Re: Space-Time and Surrealism HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 10:05 -0700
    Re: Space-Time and Surrealism "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-05-18 08:38 -0700

#578490 — Space-Time and Surrealism

The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
It has a different meaning and explanation from 
author to author, each yelling at the other: 
"You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
>
In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines, 
2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
But "space-time"? 
Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?, 
Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
>
Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes 
or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like 
and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
>
dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild 
Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the 
highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely 
means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase 
of 3D Space or Volume of some media. 
>
Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein 
Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
>
AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
AE:  know that the distinction between the
AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
AE:  persistent illusion."

Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the 
depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> 
__ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
__________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#578531

On 17.05.2016 02:51, hanson wrote:
>
> Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the depiction of Pablo
> Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".

Pablo Picasso surrealist? :-D

I note with interest that you are ignorant of arts
as well as of physics.

> __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> __________  aka Judenphysik  __________

Ah! I see.

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

#578533

Paul Anderson wrote...
> Pablo Picasso surrealist? :-D

>I note with interest that you are ignorant of arts as well as of physics.

Before you start laughing too hard, check out pablos official website.
He went through a surrealist period in the late twenties, early thirties

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

#578544

Paul B. Andersen <relativity@paulba.no> wrote:
> On 17.05.2016 02:51, hanson wrote:
>> 
>> Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the depiction of
>> Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
>> schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
>> which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> 
> Pablo Picasso surrealist? :-D
> 
> I note with interest that you are ignorant of arts
> as well as of physics.

Idiocy is usually all-round.

Dirk Vdm

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

#578554

Dirk vdm..
> Idiocy is usually all-round.

What,  You and Paul? 

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

#578566

On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 7:56:04 AM UTC-4, jay moseley wrote:
> Dirk vdm..
> > Idiocy is usually all-round.
> 
> What,  You and Paul?

Jay, it's the old "The Idiots do not know their own Idiocy" at play.
Jay, it's the old "The Stupids do not know their own Stupidity" at play.
Jay, it's the old ... in force.
Jay, it's the old "The Hypocrites  do not know their own Hypocrisy " at play.

-- MAHIPAL “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: d(me) != 0 ... me alwa(y)s changes...”

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

#578581

Hanson said (pretty sure there's only one
Hanson, but if I cause confusion with my
lack of attributions, read for content- I
blame my iPhone:
"ahahahahaha... 
> 
In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines, 
2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces. 
But "space-time"? 
Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?, 
Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"? "

Exactly, hanson!!

High five!

Time is different. Connected, but different.
Back in school, my genius roomy and I
brainstormed on Time during an
all-nighter and reached the
conclusion that it occillates according to
some period- it is not constant.

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

#578585

John
Time is different. Connected, but different. 
Back in school, my genius roomy and I 
brainstormed on Time during an 
all-nighter and reached the 
conclusion that it occillates according to 
some period- it is not constant. 
-------------

I don't even want to know what sort of drugs you were taking during this gay all nighter. Suffice it to say that these 'profound' thoughts you had were nothing more than the pipe dreams of fear crazed dope fiends.

No offense

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

#578588

HVAC said:
"I don't even want to know...."

Truer words were never spoke

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

#578779

On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 10:06:56 AM UTC-4, john wrote:
> HVAC said:
> "I don't even want to know...."
> 
> Truer words were never spoke

There are two kinds of people.
Those pretending to be insane.
And those who are HVAC insane.
Which people are worse? HVAC!!

-- MAHIPAL “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: And you HVAC will never know...”

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

#578657

"Dirk VD Trottel" <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> 
wrote that "Idiocy is usually all-round" in Einstein Dingleberries.
>
hanson wrote:
That is right, you Belgian Trottel. So here, for your
benefit, is a re-post that shows why those all-round
Einstein Dingleberries are idiots:
>
The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
It has a different meaning and explanation from 
author to author, each yelling at the other: 
"You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
>
In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines, 
2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
But "space-time"? 
Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?, 
Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
>
Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes 
or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like 
and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
>
dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild 
Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the 
highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely 
means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase 
of 3D Space or Volume of some media. 
>
Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein 
Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
>
AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
AE:  know that the distinction between the
AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
AE:  persistent illusion."

Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the 
depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> 
__ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
__________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> 


>
>

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

#578658

"Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> wrote:
> Pablo Picasso surrealist? :-D
> I note with interest that you are ignorant of arts
> as well as of physics.
>
hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... Paul, that is because you are
a house painter and an Einstein Dingleberry.
Pity.
>
>
>          ------------------- 
The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
It has a different meaning and explanation from 
author to author, each yelling at the other: 
"You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
>
In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines, 
2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
But "space-time"? 
Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?, 
Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
>
Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes 
or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like 
and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
>
dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild 
Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the 
highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely 
means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase 
of 3D Space or Volume of some media. 
>
Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein 
Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
>
AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
AE:  know that the distinction between the
AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
AE:  persistent illusion."

Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the 
depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> 
__ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
__________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> 

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

#578759

hanson wrote:
> 
> The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
> It has a different meaning and explanation from
> author to author, each yelling at the other:
> "You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
> crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
> >
> In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines,
> 2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
> But "space-time"?
> Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?,
> Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
> >
> Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
> or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes
> or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
> uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like
> and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
> >
> dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild
> Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
> saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the
> highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely
> means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
> or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase
> of 3D Space or Volume of some media.
> >
> Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
> in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein
> Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
> >
> AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
> AE:  know that the distinction between the
> AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
> AE:  persistent illusion."
> 
> Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the
> depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> >
> __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> __________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> >


Let me put is simply, but not clear...

the past does not exist
the future does not exist
the present does not exist...
that means..
spacetime isn't going anywhere.




no spacetime
no time travel 
no time dimension.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

#578762

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> hanson wrote:
> >
> > The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
> > It has a different meaning and explanation from
> > author to author, each yelling at the other:
> > "You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
> > crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
> > >
> > In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines,
> > 2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
> > But "space-time"?
> > Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?,
> > Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
> > >
> > Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
> > or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes
> > or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
> > uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like
> > and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
> > >
> > dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild
> > Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
> > saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the
> > highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely
> > means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
> > or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase
> > of 3D Space or Volume of some media.
> > >
> > Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
> > in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein
> > Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
> > >
> > AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
> > AE:  know that the distinction between the
> > AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
> > AE:  persistent illusion."
> >
> > Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the
> > depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> > schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> > which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> > >
> > __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> > __________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> > >
> 
> Let me put is simply, but not clear...
> 
> the past does not exist
> the future does not exist
> the present does not exist...
> that means..
> spacetime isn't going anywhere.
> 
> no spacetime
> no time travel
> no time dimension.
> 


In other words...spacetime is just a math idea someone came up with,
...nothing to do with nature.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

#578763

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > hanson wrote:
> > >
> > > The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
> > > It has a different meaning and explanation from
> > > author to author, each yelling at the other:
> > > "You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
> > > crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
> > > >
> > > In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines,
> > > 2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
> > > But "space-time"?
> > > Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?,
> > > Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
> > > >
> > > Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
> > > or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes
> > > or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
> > > uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like
> > > and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
> > > >
> > > dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild
> > > Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
> > > saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the
> > > highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely
> > > means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
> > > or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase
> > > of 3D Space or Volume of some media.
> > > >
> > > Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
> > > in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein
> > > Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
> > > >
> > > AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
> > > AE:  know that the distinction between the
> > > AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
> > > AE:  persistent illusion."
> > >
> > > Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the
> > > depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> > > schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> > > which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> > > >
> > > __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> > > __________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> > > >
> >
> > Let me put is simply, but not clear...
> >
> > the past does not exist
> > the future does not exist
> > the present does not exist...
> > that means..
> > spacetime isn't going anywhere.
> >
> > no spacetime
> > no time travel
> > no time dimension.
> >
> 
> In other words...spacetime is just a math idea someone came up with,
> ...nothing to do with nature.
> 



Does space move?

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

#578910

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 9:32:36 AM UTC+3, The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > 
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > hanson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
> > > > It has a different meaning and explanation from
> > > > author to author, each yelling at the other:
> > > > "You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
> > > > crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
> > > > >
> > > > In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines,
> > > > 2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
> > > > But "space-time"?
> > > > Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?,
> > > > Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
> > > > >
> > > > Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
> > > > or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes
> > > > or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
> > > > uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like
> > > > and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
> > > > >
> > > > dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild
> > > > Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
> > > > saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the
> > > > highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely
> > > > means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
> > > > or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase
> > > > of 3D Space or Volume of some media.
> > > > >
> > > > Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
> > > > in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein
> > > > Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
> > > > >
> > > > AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
> > > > AE:  know that the distinction between the
> > > > AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
> > > > AE:  persistent illusion."
> > > >
> > > > Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the
> > > > depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> > > > schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> > > > which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> > > > >
> > > > __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> > > > __________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Let me put is simply, but not clear...
> > >
> > > the past does not exist
> > > the future does not exist
> > > the present does not exist...
> > > that means..
> > > spacetime isn't going anywhere.
> > >
> > > no spacetime
> > > no time travel
> > > no time dimension.
> > >
> > 
> > In other words...spacetime is just a math idea someone came up with,
> > ...nothing to do with nature.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Does space move?

====================
a good question!!
space is nothing by definition
it has no properties except hosting mass
while 
mass is the main ''hero'' of physics 
2
had there been no complete empty space
NO MOTION WHAT SOEVER - COULD BE DONE !!!
(historic insight ) by 
TIA
Y.Porat
=================================

 

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

#578824

David (Time Lord) Fuller wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> Let me put is simply, but not clear...
> 
> the past does not exist
> the future does not exist
> the present does not exist...
> that means..
> spacetime isn't going anywhere.
> 
> no spacetime
> no time travel
> no time dimension.
> 
> Take off your shoes, hold a brick at shoulder height, and drop it on your toe.
> 
> That will give some clarity to the validity to time, space, Gravity, mass, inertia, kinetic energy & the photons that relay the information that the brick is in process of traveling towards your toe.



If I hold a brick at shoulder height, and drop it on my toe...

it has nothing to do with space and time, Gravity, mass, inertia,
kinetic energy & the photons...


it has to do with...motion.


But you need first to understand the definition of ..."motion"



There is no motion in space and time.


Does space move?

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

#578975

David (Time Lord) Fuller wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker instructed:
> 
> But you need first to understand the definition of ..."motion"
> 
> There is no motion in space and time.
> 
> Does space move?
> 
> OMG
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA


I'll put it in a different way...

imagine if gravity was 'just a theory'..


then the brick appears to be moving...
it could be at rest 
and the earth is moving
and the brick appears
to hit the toe.

And if I move my toe
out of the way...
what moved my toe? gravity? space? time? inertia? love?


I love my toe. 

So love moved my toe.


Is love physics?

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

#578979

Star Boy says

I'll put it in a different way... 

imagine if gravity was 'just a theory'.. 


then the brick appears to be moving... 
it could be at rest 
and the earth is moving 
and the brick appears 
to hit the toe. 

And if I move my toe 
out of the way... 
what moved my toe? gravity? space? time? inertia? love? 


I love my toe. 

So love moved my toe. 


Is love physics? 
--------------

Put down the pipe son and back away from the vehicle. Slowly

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

#578801

On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 3:52:22 AM UTC+3, hanson wrote:
> The term "space-time" is idiotic & ill defined.
> It has a different meaning and explanation from 
> author to author, each yelling at the other: 
> "You must learn" in their hope to cram their own
> crap down other folks' throat... ahahahahaha...
> >
> In the real world there are 1D lengths or lines, 
> 2D areas or surfaces & 3D volumes or spaces.
> But "space-time"? 
> Is it the product of "Volume x Time"?, 
> Is it a "Time in the Volume of Space"?
> >
> Semantics also says that "space" is a DIFFERENCE
> or an Interval between 2 points, 2 lines or 2 volumes 
> or 2 times, which is what the SR/GR Lawyer-language
> uses and then leads to space-like, time-like, mass-like 
> and certainly to _ass-like_ events, -states or -processes,
> >
> dubbed as Event-horizons, Roche-lobes, Schwartzschild 
> Radius, Einstein Rings, or Expanding Space, without
> saying what it expands into, &/or/not specifying that the 
> highfaluting expression of "expanding space" merely 
> means an increase in the interval between 2 observations
> or happenings, that have nothing to do with any increase 
> of 3D Space or Volume of some media. 
> >
> Most of these terms mentioned above do NOT  exist
> in the real world, except in the agile minds of Einstein 
> Dinglesberries in/during their worship of AE's sphincter:
> >
> AE:  "People like us, who **believe** in physics,
> AE:  know that the distinction between the
> AE:  past, resent, and future is only a stubbornly
> AE:  persistent illusion."
> 
> Einstein's language-use in/for SR/GR is akin to the 
> depiction of Pablo Picasso's bizarre and distorted
> schmiers of the human face & form on his canvasses
> which is his realism that he called "Surrealism".
> > 
> __ Both are Useless Yiddisher Street Corner Acts.__
> __________  aka Judenphysik  __________
> >
==========================
Hanson 
why don t you say  simply
==========================================
NO MASS - THE ONLY MASS - NO REAL PHYSICS !
==========================================
2
MASS IS THE MOTHER OF ALL FORCES - INCLUDING GRAVITY !
==============================================
3
TIME IS JUST COMPARISON OF  some MASS MOVEMENT
 TO SOME
CHOSEN MOTION REFERENCE !!
============================================== 

TIA
Y.Porat
=============================================== 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web