Re: Euclids postulates and non-Euclidean geometry

"Eric Gisse" <jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1141955034.826888.195260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Spaceman wrote:
"Eric Gisse" <jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1141942726.163895.95290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Spaceman wrote:

[snip idiocy]

Whats the shortest path a plane can take between London and New York?

<you snipped facts not idiocy>
and..
Who cares,
The path a plane takes is not the shortest distance that exists between
London and New York.

Aww, look! You still don't understand.

No,
I understand the reality that you are ignoring since
you are stuck in some sort of abstract only world.
LOL


That is what I have said and I still stick by such because it is a fact
no
matter
how much you want to play with a geodesic that is "not" the shortest
distance and never would be the shortest distance.

Aww, look. More forcing a preconcieved notion upon something you don't
understand.

Spherical geometry doesn't allow you to go 'through' the surface -
there is no embedding, thats all there is. But since you are incapable
of thinking abstractly, you don't understand.

Sperical geometry may not allow it, but reality does so
take your silly abstract only bull*** and go play in the relativity
group where abstract only is accepted as the only truth.
In this universe the truth is spherical geometry is not
the only geometry in the universe.
I am very capable of thinking abstractly, I actually allow both
abstract and physical reality to mix instead of removing
the physical completely like you tend to do.


You can play with "shortest curved paths" all you want, but it only shows
that you are ignoring the shortest distance that does physically exist
and
that
shortest "distance" would be a straight (non geodesic) line.
Sheesh!

See? You don't understand.

No,
I see you don't understand reality and again are just stuck in your
little abstract onlt world.


A plane can't fly through the earth to get to the other side of the
planet, it has to stay on the surface. There is only one path on the
surface that is the shortest. But since you have no capability for
abstract thought, this eludes you.

I never said a plane could do such you dang moron.
There is only one path that is the shortest is correct,
but when you speak of a geodesic at all there is a shorter
distance than the shortest path you think about.
Too bad you somehow have lost that shorter distance
as being there at all.



Take an orange. What is the shortest path, on the surface of the
orange, between two arbitrary points on the orange?

Are you about as smart as the orange?
I have told you.. the shortest path ON the orange is the
stupid geodesic path (a curved line) but the problem is
the shortest distance does not care about the stupid geodesic
and it seems you and your orange juice filled brain can't figure
that out anymore.

Get it straight some year Eric.
This is what I state.
A straight line is the shortest "distance",
A geodesic is the shortest path along the surface.
The thing you seem to leave out constantly is...
reality is not limited to the surface you dang fabric
of spacetime moron.

I understand it a lot more than you think and it is real
sad you don't understand that the geodesic is not
the shortest distance (a striaght line)
a geodesic is curved (or it would not be a geodesic at all)
so it is not the shortest distance.
DUH!
Sheesh you are a the smartest stupid guy around here.
LOL.



.

Loading