Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #540563
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Future Advances in Physics... |
| References | (7 earlier) <ddj54pFsc8vU1@mid.individual.net> <n51o4u$hhl$1@speranza.aioe.org> <ddj8alFt66sU1@mid.individual.net> <n51rj4$pl0$1@speranza.aioe.org> <ddnj7mF12toU1@mid.individual.net> |
| Message-ID | <jkNdy.34147$IX3.14156@fx36.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | TeraNews.com |
| Date | 2015-12-21 01:51 -0500 |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 12/20/2015 06:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 18.12.2015 21:50, schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>
>>> I have actually started at the 'GR side' and have tried to build
>>> particles out of spacetime.
>>
>> Actually, it looks like you ASSUMED particles of spacetime, via some
>> logic that reads, "Any physical system is composed of discrete elements,
>> and since spacetime is a physical system, it must then be composed of
>> discrete elements." Of course you then say something like "But spacetime
>> is a continuum" (which of course completely denies the discreteness you
>> just claimed) "and therefore the elements must be points with
>> properties."
>
> The underlying principle are not pointlike particles, but pointlike
> 'elements of spacetime', what are assumed to be the equivalent to a
> point, but with features.
>
>
> TH
Give up on Boinker, TH. The concept of the granularity of space that
explains it all is WAY over his pointy little head. He makes wooden
toys, you know.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 07:45 -0600
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 08:24 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... "Mapple Babble" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-12-19 11:28 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 11:59 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 12:15 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-18 20:29 +0100
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 13:52 -0600
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-18 21:23 +0100
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 14:50 -0600
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-20 12:54 +0100
Re: Future Advances in Physics... benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-12-21 01:51 -0500
Re: Future Advances in Physics... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-22 05:12 +0100
Re: Future Advances in Physics... "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 00:40 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 21:39 -0500
Re: Future Advances in Physics... HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 07:48 -0800
Re: Future Advances in Physics... benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-12-19 13:46 -0500
Re: Future Advances in Physics... "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-12-20 02:22 -0800
csiph-web