Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #378518

Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution

From	Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution
Date	2016-03-10 21:27 +0000
Organization	W. Gottfried
Message-ID	<nbsosb$tb$3@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <0aKdnTBtXYv6NnzLnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <nbsl1h$1reb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <632cbe96-46cf-4646-ac83-7353c1262995@googlegroups.com> <nbsnor$1vpc$1@gioia.aioe.org> <e59a8c76-fe79-4f31-8864-63d68ad5646b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

JanPB wrote:

> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 1:08:47 PM UTC-8, Luigi Durante wrote:
>> JanPB wrote:
>> 
>> >> You are too kind, mister Tom, not saying he talks nonsense. As he
>> >> thinks that two infinitesimally separated points on a sphere are
>> >> connected by a tangent, lol. A mathematical impossibility, no? Ok.
>> > 
>> > Newsflash: that's not what I said. What I said was:
>> > 
>> > 1. "two infinitesimally separated points" is a metaphor, it's not
>> > valid mathematics. That metaphor is _very_ useful provided you have
>> > enough experience to know how to work with it correctly,
>> > 
>> > 2. the legal, correct, mathematical object that represents that
>> > metaphor is the tangent vector. That vector obviously does not
>> > "connect" any "two points" on the sphere.
>> 
>> Apparently you contradict yourself again.
>> 
>> 1. "two infinitesimally separated points" is a metaphor,
>> 2.  that metaphor is the tangent vector
>> 
>> 3. "two infinitesimally separated points" = "the tangent vector"
>> 
>> Well, how not? Or is us incapable to read and simplify, no? Ok.
> 
> Looks like you are more interesting in arguing than actually reading
> what I wrote. OK, one more time (only):

Not at all, you feels cornered. Admit it and let's talk about something 
else

> 
> Your (1) above is a correct interpretation of what I wrote.
> (2) and (3) are not.

2. ".. that metaphor is the tangent vector."

3. is perfect, mathematically.

> I said tangent vector represents the metaphor (i.e., its an actual
> mathematical object which behaves exactly as one would _expect_ the
> metaphor to behave (if it was a real object)).
> And of course there is no such equality as (3) because the LHS doesn't
> exist (it's a metaphor).

It is, not? Ok.

WORLD EXCLUSIVE-DAVID CAMERON TO COME OUT AS TRANSGENDER 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnRZjb4GkDE

Thread

Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 17:05 -0800
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 22:28 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 22:47 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:01 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:04 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:27 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:28 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 23:40 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 00:21 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-02-24 10:39 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 12:59 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 13:12 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 08:46 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-02-24 19:54 +0100
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 01:20 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 01:39 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-02-24 11:12 +0100
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 08:37 -0600
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-02-24 07:16 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 22:31 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-02-25 06:30 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 09:11 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:13 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:38 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 17:44 +0000
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:50 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 11:51 -0600
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:57 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 12:05 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 10:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:13 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 10:21 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:05 +0000
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 09:48 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Jackpol11@hotmail.com - 2016-02-25 14:06 -0500
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 12:35 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-25 21:44 +0000
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Jackpol11@hotmail.com - 2016-02-25 17:37 -0500
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 15:11 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:44 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 06:57 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:59 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 18:45 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:37 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 19:36 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 07:50 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 18:47 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:44 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 15:47 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:00 -0800
              Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:09 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:29 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:43 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-26 23:04 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:59 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 16:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-27 10:27 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-27 17:55 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 12:13 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 11:37 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 12:56 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:03 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:13 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:26 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:50 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 20:40 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 19:44 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 12:20 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 20:58 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 13:02 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 12:31 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-29 22:40 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 07:30 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 17:46 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:51 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Emigdio Sophronius <emigg@augustvisitors.org> - 2016-02-28 17:01 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 07:34 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 15:15 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 19:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 08:48 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-28 09:13 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:09 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-03-06 10:56 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:19 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:24 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 18:34 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 09:44 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-28 19:12 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 10:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 11:17 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 17:06 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 17:54 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 19:41 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-04 01:17 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:12 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:53 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 22:19 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 21:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-10 11:14 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-10 18:32 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 20:22 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 13:02 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 21:08 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 13:19 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-10 21:27 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 14:04 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-11 13:33 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-10 22:49 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 14:20 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 05:24 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 21:36 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 22:50 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-05 11:24 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 20:07 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 14:49 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Helénē Swanhild <helenes@gardenclosure.org> - 2016-03-03 21:40 +0000
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 18:58 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 14:04 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:46 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-03 22:21 -0600
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 16:42 -0800
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-02-26 20:00 +0100
                Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution PC <pc468@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-26 19:03 +0000
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 19:36 -0800
  Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 09:36 -0800
    Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:33 -0800
      Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 12:05 -0800
        Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:47 -0800
          Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution alsor@interia.pl - 2016-02-26 14:16 -0800
            Re: Schwarzschild's paper and the uniqueness of the solution JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 15:02 -0800

csiph-web