Re: No true relativist!

On 11/12/2024 12:13 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/12/2024 11:11 AM, rhertz wrote:

On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 17:53:00 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:
>

Thomas Heger: There simply are no other dimensions. To think so is to
make the elementary logical error called the reification fallacy. You
may describe anything you like as a metaphorical dimension. That does
not make it a spatial dimension. Time is not a spatial dimension. It is
only a metaphorical dimension. Spaces have no higher dimensions, and
these have never been empirically verified, as anyone can understand a
priori by elementary logic. "Such a space" could not be built. Space can
only be cut up into dimensions and not created. One can divide space
into six dimensions by encompassing it in a dodecahedron. That creates
no more space. Your mathematical imaginings are weak-minded nonsense.
You might try again to construct something that looks like a valid
universe because assuming the spacetime of GR is an unwarranted
assumption and pure nonsense. Ignorant nonsense.

>
Here is an example of geometrical stupidity, which CAN'T EXIST.
Same thing with paranormal activities and relativity. Pure
PSEUDO-SCIENCE, with no physical existence or proof of existence.
>
Or the 11 dimensions in the string theory. Sick minds!
>
>
>
>
This is called a Klein Bottle, an object that can only exist in 4
dimensions. In 4 dimensions, then neck of the bottle penetrates into the
body without ever touching it.
>
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/su5ypp/this_is_called_a_klein_bottle_an_object_that_can/
>
>

>
The "11 dimensions" is simply that for 1 dimension in 3-D space:
that the 1 dimension, has its "ends" or "curls", with regards to
the other dimensions, the only point being that a turn from one
dimension to the next, has these "ends" or "curls" to contain
"analytical character".
>
Think of space dimensions x, y, z.
>
X: 1 + dY + dZ
Y: 1 + dZ + dX
Z: 1 + dX + dY
>
Then, with one dimension for _time_, then a final
dimension for _perspective_, it's really only a
framing of _perspective_, as for matters of _projection_,
that it's really only 3-D again, and for 1/2 for a
ray of time (arrow of time).
>
So, your aspersions against "11-dimensions" are simply because
you seem un-aware that it's merely a book-keeping for
3 space dimensions and a ray of time.
>
The superstrings/supercordes are very merely "infinitesimals"
with regards to "atoms", and simply "on the order of",
their size, twice as much to us, as atoms are to us.
>
Keeping things simple.
>
Anyways that is foolish and there's a 3 + 1/2 superstring theory
and also there's a hologrammmatic 1 + dt superstring theory.
(With the "ends" and "curls" as "infinities" and "infinitesimals"
in the one dimension there.)
>
The "26 dimensions" are just that again among two fields.
>
Kaluza-Klein, ..., is merely a book-keeping dimension.
>
It's matters of "perspective" and "projection",
the "geometry" and "motion".
>
>
It's a continuum mechanics, ....
>
>
>

Of course "real mathematics of continuous domains"
and with regards to "the continuous and discrete"
and "analog and digital" make for that there are
multiple laws, plural, of large numbers, defying
merely inductive incomplete linear accounts,
making for three _different_ continuous domains
in a theory like descriptive set theory + analysis
+ topology + function theory, these as like line-reals,
just like clock arithmetic, field-reals, just like
the Pythagorans and Eudoxus, and signal-reals,
like Shannon and Nyquist, explaining that mathematics
_owes_ physics these simple, central, primary,
fundamental formalisms that for example I have
written up in the past few decades.
Of course Zeno will provide a ready inductive
proof that nothing ever really happens anyways,
then that it is for a fuller dialectic and after
a conscientious and critical deconstructive account,
a fuller deductive analysis, to arrive at the
realities of mathematical "point and space" a
geometry, an axiomless natural geometry, of
which Euclid's falls out.
Not merely "almost, yet not quite", "everywhere",
fixing up "the measure problem".
All one theory, ....
It's a continuum mechanics, ....