Re: Crank Magnet
From: David McAnally (D.McAnally_at_i'm_a_gnu.uq.net.au)
Date: 12/24/04
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: A question about physicists and Einsteins SR Theory"
- Previous message: harry: "Re: O'Barr comments on your SR FAQ."
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Next in thread: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: The Sceptical Chymist: "Euclid takes the 5th (was crank magnets)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 24 Dec 2004 00:17:54 GMT
Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> writes:
>No self-consistent mathematical construct can be internally falsified,
>Euclid or Einstein. Euclid fell when his Fifth (Parallel) Postulate
>fell - Riemann, and Bolyai and Lobechevsky; then Thurston to do them
>all,
I saw one person describe the work of Bolyai and Lobachevsky as a
vindication of Euclid, on the basis that Euclid was aware enough to make
his Fifth Postulate a Postulate, and not attempt to make it a Proposition.
In other words, it vindicated Euclid because he never attempted to prove
it, but chose, instead, to assume it.
David
-----
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: A question about physicists and Einsteins SR Theory"
- Previous message: harry: "Re: O'Barr comments on your SR FAQ."
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Next in thread: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Crank Magnet"
- Reply: The Sceptical Chymist: "Euclid takes the 5th (was crank magnets)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|