Re: Time is an illusion -- more on Lynds

In article <iLGdnSGE-fESACffRVn-ow@xxxxxxx>, jmfbahciv@xxxxxxx writes:
>[spit]
>
>In article <Dn_te.15$45.3736@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>My apologies; this isn't the best post to piggyback but
>I was waiting to learn something about the following.
>Alas and alack, the thread poofed in a puff of smoke and
>mirrors.
>
><snip>
>
>>And I told you that this is a nonsense. You can have a set of points
>>of the form (x,y,z,t_0) when t_0 is an arbitrary constant time. This
>>is a 3D space. But time is defined for it.
>
><snip>
>
>Okey-dokey. Let me try to ask some questions.
>
>1. I am assuming that this stuff about embeddedness has
>the mathmatical incantation called topology. This is my
>first question. If I'm wrong, what is the word?
>
Depends what aspects you're talking about. Topology relatesto some
but mostly what you need is geometry (differential geometry for
fancier stuff).

>2. If I wanted to practice doing embedded problems, what kind
>of textbook would I look for? I would wish to have something
>that has the rigor of math with a very high bias of physics.
>
No idea, I work out what I need, when I need it. Perhaps somebody
else has suggestions.

>3. Is there such a book for Real Dummies, where Real Dummies
>have no tolerance for the cutesy baloney in those "Xxx for
>Dummies" books with the yellow and black covers.
>
Again, I don't know.

>I realize these questions may be difficult to answer. You
>may ignore them, if you wish. For a measure of my
>dumminess, I had extreme problems with the story _Flatland_
>and still do. That's why I need practice.
>
>/BAH
>
>
>Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | chances are he is doing just the same"
.