Re: Euclids postulates and non-Euclidean geometry


"T Wake" <taswakeAt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aa-dne1S3acyYI_ZRVnyiQ@xxxxxxxxxxxx
"Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mfednbq44fbgao_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"T Wake" <taswakeAt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Nq-dnbkgHJAPf4_ZRVny2Q@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Do you hang out with Jeff Relf and share ideas for jokes?

Jeff Relf?
The crackpot that uses physics of Einstein to say aliens know how
to create spacetime wormholes?
I can't stand that guy.

Yet you have so much in common.

The conversation is centring on the ability to rationalise movement in a
variety of dimensions simultaneously. This is done by creating an
analogy (i.e. something which is representative of - not a complete
description of) of the real world with less dimensions of movement.
Obviously the airplane analogy requires too much imagination for you to
be happy with. We can use others.

No,
I am fine with the airplane analogy, it is you that does not get how
there are no such limitations of surface measurement to the universe.
So I laugh at such limitations.

Well, you state you are fine with the airplane analogy yet you fail to
understand its limitiations when it comes to describing reality.

No,
I understand where it can fail to find a measurement that is the shortest
distance simply because it is trying to follow a path it is limited to.
but reality is not limited to these "surface measurement" you think it is.


I think the cosmological expansion situation, being real, may suit our
needs better. Dont you?

No matter what you want to use, you are simply removing the reality
of shortest distance and seem to want to remove Euclidian geometry
completely.
I have no clue why you refuse to use Euclidian geometry.


Can you, without resorting to a two dimensional analogy explain how the
cosmological expansion of large scale structures takes place in all
directions and implies no centre?

Where are you getting that the expansion implies no center?
Are you saying you can't find the oldest light waves?

Expansion in three directions implies no centre.

No it does not.
Where are you coming up with such crap.
You are basically saying an explosion can't expand from
one center.
You truly need to rethink that.
blow up a balloon and it has a center,
The surface is not where you would look for a center
so looking for the center on the surface is just plain
limited thinking and you are doing such terribly.



The oldest light waves do not tell us where the centre of the universe is.

Yes it would.
How do you know how old the universe is if you have not found
a center of the expansion?

Why would I need more than 3D? a straight line does such.

So can you explain to me then how the line between the two objects,
recessing in three dimensions still looks straight in three dimensions
please.

I told you.
get on your 3D program and look,.
It will look like a straight line from 2 of the dimension minumun
and may look like a point in a 3rd


Why don't you get such about a straight line is what I think is pretty
ignorant of reality.

The dot is not a straight line. It is a dot.

optical illusion only.
You seem to love ignoring those exist huh?

We are talking about a theoretical construct. Do you know what the word
theoretical means?

Yes,
But I am talking about a real construct.
You know what the word real means huh?
Oh wait.. you don't anymore..
You think real is all in the imagination right?

No,
my understanding is not limited at all,
It is reality that is limiting it because I seperate science
from scifi, unlike you seem to do.

No you don't. You have an idea of how things should be and refuse to
accept any development of theories. Your ideas of science fall down
drastically at the cosmological and the quantum scale. Sadly, you have no
way of conceptualising either situation, nor the equipment to study them,
so you dismiss their existence.

My ideas have no problems with cosmological nor the quantum scales.
You somehow just don't think logically enough to see such anymore.


What?
You love to twist way off into your own little twist land all the time
huh?
Next you will think I am saying Einstein should be dug up and stripped
of his nobel after we bring him back to life to tell him he was wrong.

Why do you think he can be brought back to life? Are you reading too much
fiction?

I merely said you would be wanting that next.
I did not say it was possible at all.
You love to twist like that huh?


That is very grim of you.

But true. You probably have less than 55 years to live. I have even less.

It is irrelevant to the converstation.
Tis sad you need to jump around to so many things instead of
talking about the currect subject.


What rubber *** world?

The surface limited joke you think is a reality.



.

Loading