Re: Updated - new theory of space and matter
From: Gary Forbat (garyforbat_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/01/04
- Next message: ahmad: "Re: Q: biorthogonal 7,9 (9,7?) wavelet coefficients???"
- Previous message: Gib Bogle: "Re: Scientific books: cheap sell-out of the library"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 1 Jul 2004 03:16:10 -0700
The TimeLord <mathnphysics-not@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<10cvdncpnc7hgb0@corp.supernews.com>...
> Gary Forbat <garyforbat@yahoo.com> wrote on Sunday 13 June 2004 20:26 in
> <a836ace0.0406131726.73390e68@posting.google.com> posted in
> alt.sci.time-travel:
>
> > find this general explanation of space and matter on URL
> > 1 on micro physics
> > Chapter 2 on macro physics
> >
> > Discussion welcome
> >
> > www.geocities.com/garyforbat
>
> Well, the content is not very good. Chapters 1 and 2 are basically some kind
> of interview, where we don't know if Gary Forbat is the interviewer or the
> interviewee. You have to scroll all the way down to "Advanced Principles"
> to get to anything that seems to explain this "theory".
>
> "Advanced Principles" sets forth what appears to be the axioms of Forbat's
> theory, most of which tend to be related to Psychology rather than space
> and matter. Thus the theory doesn't apply to space and matter but, maybe,
> to Psychology.
>
> The first principle that seems to relate in a remote way to space and matter
> is principle 6, which simply redefines time in such a way as to be
> incompatible with reality.
>
> I had to crack up on principle 10, which is simply a false statement.
> Einstein included empty space because empty space is flat space-time. Since
> space-time can be flat, empty space is possible in both SR and GR. In the
> end, Forbat claims, in capital letters, that space can not curve. However,
> this is equivalent to saying that when the space-time metric depends on
> position, it always depends in such a way that the curvature tensor is
> always equal to zero. Thus the existence of a force such as gravity would
> be impossible. We know that gravity is possible (example: you being
> attracted to Earth), thus the statement on Forbat's website about space
> not being able to curve is false. - I'm not sure what he wanted to show by
> his comments on "Binary Aspects". Nevertheless, the four coordinates of
> events are 3 coordinates of regular space and 1 coordinate of time for a
> total of 4 coordinates (dimensions). Space-time (or event-space as it's
> also called) will always have at least 4 dimensions because of that.
>
> >
> > Placed in a fictional setting
> > Chapter
>
> ???
TimeLord thanks for your contribution. It is obvious to me that you
have not read the main essay but went straight to the end line and the
summaries that follow. The Advanced Principles are meant to be read
after the essays, presupposing what is ithere, but you show no
indication whatsoever that you know the content since you mention only
minor issues and miss the main points,like the dynamic structuring
process etc....Please read the essay first before commenting.
I have now rewritten and added to parts of the essay and began chapter
3 with clues of what is to follow. I hope you have some criticism of
the real issues.
TimeLord
YOU WROTE:
"Advanced Principles" sets forth what appears to be the axioms of
Forbat's
theory, most of which tend to be related to Psychology rather than
space
and matter. Thus the theory doesn't apply to space and matter but,
maybe,
to Psychology.
MY REPLY:
I do not see why you think it is psychology. Perhaps you could
elaborate on this. The only thing that comes to mind is Kant's theory
of space, that space is a 'secondaty quality' like colours, and 3d is
not an actual reality but a mind dependent analysis of a non-spatial
object....or something like that....I believe Einstein was deeply
influenced by these ideas. Somehow I think this is not what you meant.
If you did mean this, then you will need to wait until I publish my
Critique of Einstein's Relativity theories. There are a number of
problems, one of which is the one I just mentioned. Other problems
include not discharging the hypothetical when deriving the square root
of minus one through inducing a hypothetical, thereby creating inverse
equivalences....and of course the problem of space matter
interactivity.
YOU WROTE:
The first principle that seems to relate in a remote way to space and
matter
is principle 6, which simply redefines time in such a way as to be
incompatible with reality.
MY REPLY:
This is a wild and unfounded statement that anybody can make. If you
want clarification you need to be more specific so I can answer you
objection.
YOU WROTE:
I had to crack up on principle 10, which is simply a false statement.
Einstein included empty space because empty space is flat space-time.
Since
space-time can be flat, empty space is possible in both SR and GR.
MY REPLY:
Yes you are cracked up on this point. As already explained above, my
objection is Einstein making matter and space interactive. My idea is
that space is an underlaying emptiness (though never found in empty
form)which forms the receptacle for matter to exist in. I say nothing
can interact with emptiness, and that is intuitively obvious.
YOU WROTE:
In the end, Forbat claims, in capital letters, that space can not
curve. However, this is equivalent to saying that when the space-time
metric depends on position, it always depends in such a way that the
curvature tensor is always equal to zero. Thus the existence of a
force such as gravity would be impossible. We know that gravity is
possible (example: you being attracted to Earth), thus the statement
on Forbat's website about space not being able to curve is false.
YOU WROTE:
Placed in a fictional setting?
MY REPLY:
By questioning this it is proof you haven't read the work. It should
be obvious to anyone.
*****************************
*****************************
TMELORD, this appears a classical example of judging ideas from an
incompatible framework. Of course it will look incorrect if you take
the current theories as the standard of thought by which to judge it.
If and when you read my 'dialogues' open mind and follow each point on
its own merits.
TimeLord, I suggest you read the latest version and comment directly
on issues raised therein. I welcome your or a anybody else's
criticisms as long as they are specific to the point and detailed in
your objection so I may respond with similar detail.
There is more to come when I update the 'dialogues'in the upcoming
months. Please excuse the slow progress of the essay. Due to work
commitments in other directions I have only a few hours in each week
to work on it.
- Next message: ahmad: "Re: Q: biorthogonal 7,9 (9,7?) wavelet coefficients???"
- Previous message: Gib Bogle: "Re: Scientific books: cheap sell-out of the library"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
