Re: Euclids postulates and non-Euclidean geometry


Spaceman wrote:
"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.

Last I checked, airplanes don't fly through the ground. Then again, who
knows what you see - you seem pretty deranged.

In this universe the truth is spherical geometry is not
the only geometry in the universe.

Did I say it was?

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.

No, you aren't. You cannot answer a simple math problem without crying
foul, nor can you understand a simple geometric question while playing
by the rules you are given.



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.

You don't get it. Even though you will still not understand, I will
explain again.

Spherical geometry is not embedded in Euclidian space - there is no way
to go "through" the surface of the sphere in the geometry, you have to
play by the rules.

The fact that you are fighting a very valid and useful geometry just
shows me that you have no interest in understanding math and how it
applies to this world.

Do you know any surveyors? Ask them how spherical geometry relates to
the world. Try not to laugh in the surveyor's face.

[snip child babble]

Reading what you write is painful.

.

Loading