Re: New addition to the list of Relativity Critics/Skeptics

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

I think non-Euclidean geometry is recognizable as necessarily involving
the reification fallacy, so it is not true. It is necessary to attribute
qualities to abstract space to suppose that parallel lines meet. Contrary
to Tom Roberts, in physics, one cannot use models that involve reification
fallacy because they cannot account for causation.

FYI, all this talk of // lines meeting at infinity is obsolete.
In modern presentations Euclidean geometry is defined
as that geometry in which the Pythagorean theorem holds.
The intersection at infinity, or better non-intersetction in the finite
can then be proven as a theorem.

The two definitions can be shown to be equivalent,

Jan