Re: space-time + matter/energy OR space-time-matter


Michael Hell wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
Michael Hell wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:

[snip]
How fortunate for you since now you don't actually have to learn
anything complex....like math.

Yes, very fortunate.

The new ideas are that simpler mathematics which yield greater
complexity are the more appropriate tools for the new generation of
physicists than pre-digital mathematics.

Since you have no education in physics, I find it interesting that you
feel you are capable of saying what is and what is not a more
appropriate tool.

You never even learned calculus, how can you make that kind of
judgement?



The question at hand is: can continuous functions produce the
complexity of all the universe's phenomena in one theory?

Wrong answer.

How can you judge anything regarding physics or mathematics when your
education is at the high school level?



I'm sure your professors can't even answer that question, and they
learned calculus.

Actually, they can. The answer is "no". The reason behind the answer,
however, is beyond your understanding. Discontinuous functions are
quite important in physics


So learning calclus sufficiently to pass time-limited exams doesn't
give one any extra insight into that question.

Sounds like you failed calculus and are bitter about it.

You can't even work out a marginally complex problem using Newtonian
mechanics because you don't have any idea how to use calculus.



However, it is worth noting that Einstein wrote, near his end, that
Heisenberg's work indicated the continuous function won't work, his
castle in the sky was all for naught, and some sort of discrete
mathematics will likely take its place.

YOU HAVE NO FUCKING CONCEPT OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, IDIOT.

All this garbage about continuous functions not being usable because
the world is quantum is fucking bull***.

I have studied physics from actual textbooks - thermodynamics, quantum
mechanics, electrodynamics, classical mechanics. How about you?

Moron.

.

Quantcast