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


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

I'm not really judging anything.

Really?

For a guy who doesn't have an education in physics or mathematics, you
seem pretty sure of yourself.

I was just relating some of the new ideas floating around.

Lets see.

You have no idea what the "old ideas" are, much less how they are used.
But you feel these "new ideas", which you also don't know understand,
are worth considering?


Many respectable people feel these ideas are worth considering, and the
ideas interest me.

Yet *even more* people think the mathematics that is the underpinning
of 19th, 20th, and 21st century physics is worth learning - yet you
refuse to do so.

You failed calculus in high school and you think there is a way to do
physics without having to learn something as "hard" as calculus.




When are you going to learn calculus? You have such a boner for
Leibniz's ideas, why do you shun calculus?


I don't shun calculus.

....which is why you still refuse to learn it? I guess you don't want to
try again after failing it in high school.

Christ, it isn't even that hard. Especially compared to the other
things I have had to learn - quantum mechanics would make you cry.


I'm just interested in other types of mathematics, particulary the
mathematics at the heart of chaos, complexity, and game theory.

Geeeeee....

A great example of chaos is how a small variance in the initial
conditions of a differential equation can yield massively different
solutions. Or how the errors introduced by floating point arithmetic
can introduce chaos. Too bad you can't study that part of chaos - you
don't know any calculus!

Complexity? Good fucking luck with computer science if you can't handle
a little calculus.

Game theory? Did you know the underpinnings of probability theory are
calculus based?

Your "interest" amounts to table top reading. You aren't actually
interested enough to invest time and mental energy into learning
something new.

.

Quantcast