Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
From: George Hammond (nowhere_at_nomailspam.com)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: shuba: "Re: Ideas please?"
- Previous message: eleaticus: "Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws"
- In reply to: Alan: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: Goran Dhemmeog: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 02:06:11 +0000 (UTC)
"Alan" <gper@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:847702a8.0410161335.418266c5@posting.google.com...
> hcraeser731@hotmail.com (Goran Dhemmeog) wrote in message
news:<b9eccd47.0410160655.620d33eb@posting.google.com>...
>
>
> [snip]
> > [Dhemmeog]
> > You cannot simply understand the concept of a metric. I really cannot
> > argue anything about that. Call me stupid and incompetent, but I can
> > only say that you do not understand mathematics. There is nothing to
> > argue about. Your statement is a tautology: "a cube is a cube because
> > a cube is a cube", the metric has nothing to do with this. You have
> > not established a causal relation between the metric and the shape of
> > objects. (Hint: there is none). This is like claiming that we cause
> > the moon! Because we call it "moon" therefore we are the cause of
> > moon.
>
> [Alan]
> Forgive me if I've missed something here (I've been REAL busy and
> haven't kept up for a few days), but "a causal relation between the
> metric and the shape of objects" CAN, I believe, be shown. Mr.
> Hammond has, at times, though, made statements that the metric CAUSES
> the objects to exist in the first place (which I believe IS nonsense),
> but that's another matter.
>
> Consider a cube. There is a relationship between the lengths of the
> sides and the lengths of the diagonals, according to the Pythagorian
> Theorem, right? If the metric of Real Space were different, the same
> relationships might not hold; you can't BUILD a "cube" in Real Space
> where the diagonal of the side of a unit cube is NOT equal to sqrt2 or
> the internal diagonals are NOT equal to sqrt3, but you COULD describe,
> mathematically, a 3-dimensional "object" (with no REAL existence in
> *this* universe, that we know of, BECAUSE the metric is as it is),
> that is six-sided, twelve-straight-edged, and where the corners
> consist of three orthogonal right angles, where the diagonals are NOT
> equal to sqrt2 & sqrt3. Such an "object" does of course have a
> different shape than a "normal" cube - and this shape IS determined by
> the metric.
>
[Hammond]
Cripes... you're CORRECT of course in your above statement.
Are you a mathematician by any chance... or simply a native genius?
Allow me to retract my previous ad homs directed towards you.
This singular piece of common sense is worthy refutation of a
thousand insults...
I am very grateful to you for pointing out this simple piece of common
sense which Mssr. Dhemmeog, mathematican and author of "many
Phys. Rev. A mathematical papers" seems unable to comprehend and
continues to insult my common sense about it.
George Hammond
PS: you might be interested to know Einstein agrees with you also:
[Hammond... in response to Dhemmeog]
Einstein clearly states the CAUSAL EFFECT of the metric
on the configuration (shape) of the n points defining a simple
(pologonal) object on page 8 of his book _The Meaning of Relativity_
where he says:
--------Einstein quote ibid page 8-------------------
"That Euclidean geometry (the Euclidean Metric)... affirms something
more than mere deductions derived from definitions may be seen
from the following simple consideration: There are n(n-1)/2 distances
between n points in space.... the metric furnishes n(n-1)/2 equations
for these distances in terms of the 3n coordinates of the points. But
the 3n coordinates may be elimintated from these equations leaving
at least n(n-1)/2 - 3n * equations between the distances themselves.
Since these distances are real measurable quantities and by definition
are independent of each other, these relations between the distances
are NOT NECCESSARY A PRIORI."
* In reality there are n(n-1)/2 - 3n + 6 equations
--------- end quote-------------------
Here Einstein is clearly telling us that the impostion of a
METRIC on a space physically affects (e.g. determines)
the CONFIGURATION that may be assumed by any N points
pologonally connected. The configuration (shapes) of the
pologonal figures are "determined by the metric".
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================
- Next message: shuba: "Re: Ideas please?"
- Previous message: eleaticus: "Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws"
- In reply to: Alan: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Next in thread: Goran Dhemmeog: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
