Re: Is This a Subtle but Completely Legitimate Redefinition, Bewildering Magic or Paradox?
- From: Shubee <e.Shubee@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
On Jul 31, 12:44 pm, The TimeLord <math-n-physics-...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Am Thu, 31 Jul 2008 07:12:18 -0700 schrieb Shubee <e.Shu...@xxxxxxxxx> in
c5b1e537-4d00-41f6-9cbb-98047f138...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in
sci.physics.relativity:
On Jul 31, 8:38 am, jem <x...@xxxxxxx> wrote:[...]
Shubee wrote:
[...]Do you seriously believe, mathematician Shooby, that y=6*x is
"logically equivalent" to y=3*x, because x can be rescaled by a factor
of 2?
Therefore y=6*x is "logically equivalent" to y=3*w, because x can be
rescaled by a suitable factor. It also logically follows that you are
willfully blind.
Think about what you are saying. For which combinations of [x,y] does one
equation equal the other? Only [0,0]! For [6,1] the first equation is
true but the second not. Therefore they are *not* logically equivalent.
I have said in advance that w=2x. http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
Where's the contradiction?
Shubee
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- Next by Date: Re: Is This a Subtle but Completely Legitimate Redefinition,
- Previous by thread: Re: Is This a Subtle but [snip]
- Next by thread: Re: Is This a Subtle but Completely Legitimate Redefinition, Bewildering Magic or Paradox?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|