Re: Euclids postulates and non-Euclidean geometry


"T Wake" <taswakeAt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O-qdneHnnLZYm47ZRVnyug@xxxxxxxxxxxx
"Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hLGdnSMT2qnvn47ZRVn-sg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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

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.

When have I said it was?

I said it was a limited analogy.

Do you want me to explain this in simpler terms for you?

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.

You misunderstand me if you think this.

I have no clue why you refuse to use Euclidian geometry.

I dont refuse to use it. Like all tools it has its place.


Expansion in three directions implies no centre.

No it does not.
Where are you coming up with such crap.

Well, the problem is everything is recessing from everything else. Where
is the centre?

If everything is truly recessing from everything than somehwhere
there is a middle of such.


You are basically saying an explosion can't expand from
one center.

No I am not. You have interpreted what I have written like that.

but everything in the explosion is recessing from everything in
the explosion.


You truly need to rethink that.
blow up a balloon and it has a center,

Yes. A balloon is a balloon and its inflation does not represent the
expansion of the universe.

Sure it does.
the entire inside of the balloon is expanding space.


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.

Who said anything about the surface here? Are you predicting the response
to your attack on the balloon because it is an oft used analogy for
cosmological expansion?

You are the one that cant' find a center.
The only way you could not find such is by ingoring the
center and concentrating on the expansion points.


I am aware of the limitations you have when it comes to visualising the
universe so I have chosen not to use analogies.

You are not aware at all.
That is your problem.


Large scale structures in the universe are observed to move away from each
other in all three dimensions. This has not indicated where, or even if
there is, a centre of the universe is / was.

You can attempt to visualise this in any way you wish.

I visualize it as it would have to have a center, of they are
not truly expanding outward


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?

Oddly enough, the approximate age of the universe is quite well determined
now (given acceptable error bars of course), yet there is still no known
centre of the universe. I can not explain this to you because you refuse
to accept any of the non-three dimensional analogies which could be used.

How did you find the age if you have no center to judge
the expansion from?


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

So it doesnt look like a straight line in all three dimensions then? Your
original statement was the line had to look straight in all three
dimensions - now you say it looks like a straight line in two but not the
third.

Actually it does also look like a line in the third,.
If you move in the plane you see the dot, you will see the line form


Then we are talking about different things. Your abilities in science will
be constrained by your lack of theoretical insight.

It is your abilities are are lacking the reality because your brain
is too full of theoreticals and seems to have lost some or maybe all
of the reality.


My ideas have no problems with cosmological nor the quantum scales.

But they do have problems on both scales.

Nope.
No problems at all.
Too bad you can't grasp that fact.


If not, can you show me the straight line that describes the shortest
possible distance between two large scale cosmological structures,
recessing in three dimensions?

I told you.
use your 3D program.
Why do you keep repeating this even when you have been given an answer
that works already.
Sheesh!
You are more of a troll than you think.
LOL.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Euclids postulates and non-Euclidean geometry
    ... but reality is not limited to these "surface measurement" you think it is. ... I said it was a limited analogy. ... other in all three dimensions. ... It will look like a straight line from 2 of the dimension minumun ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Analyse This!
    ... if it is consistent with zero, who is expanding the universe ... as an open or closed spacetime manifold. ... except in 4 dimensions instead of the 2 ... Any analogy can be taken too far. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Looking into the past with a telescope
    ... the 2D world is an analogy. ... As a 3D being you understand the world in 3 dimensions. ... The answer is that you'd observe some odd things about the universe--things that don't easily fit into your 3D view, like a universe that expands away from any point within it, and has no center. ... You have to imagine a 2D being who knows nothing beyond the surface of the balloon. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: The last word on Hillary Clinton:
    ... Actually, if you want a real dose of reality, look ... sound important. ... The truth is that we can't stop ... universe does it make sense to say that Hillary can override nature. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: OT: RADIO LIBERTY newsletter September 2007
    ... time and the whole universe was an infinitesimal unit containing the ... Timeless Reality: ... mathematical) and rigorously quantitative textbooks on Quantum theory ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)
Loading