usenet weirdness

You are free to think that. I wouldn't go around telling other people that you think that - it would suggest that you had a rather poor grasp of reality

Lots of people were happy to claim him as being Jewish after he got famous.

You logic may be simple, but it looks very much as if most of it is wrong.

And you have just posted one.

Science is a complicated mechanism and you're dumb. Explaining you what it is doing would be hopeless. Anyway, if f all human won't like it and say "false!" - there is no possibility of objecting.

So do humans.

Why do you think that?

Very little. Your name suggests that you aren't a native speaker of English, and your English is fluent and correct, but if your father picked your name, English could easily be your mother tongue. Your ignorance of the way the GPS clocks work suggest that you haven't had a technical education, but I wasn't taught about them when I got my Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry - they didn't exist back then.

The one you have snippeed some times already.

And the clocks designed by some morons to fulfill some moronic prophecies of their insane guru - definitely are not "proper clocks". The proper clocks keep indicating t'=t, with the precision of an acceptable error, just like they always did. Anyone can check GPS, or any other timekeeping system. Common sense has been warning the idiot.

Too bad:( Common sense has been warning the idiot.

Didn't pendulums have quite predictable errors?

No you can't.

And still your insane religion can't enforce its "proper" clocks idiocy on sane people. Anyone can check GPS, or any other timekeeping system.

Was enough, however, to slander that I'm someone that"hasn't had the kind of education". Why not? You're a knight of The S*it's Truth, The One And The Only Truth. Who opposes you opposes The Truth, why not slander him?

Your name suggests that you aren't a native speaker of

It's not my ignorance, it's yours. Sorry.

There is -simply- no triangle on a sphere, it's a flat figure. Since there is no triangle - there is no right triangle without Pythagorean property on a sphere. Spherical triangle is no more a triangle than a tasmanian devil is a devil. And

Just a paragraph above you said it was always two dimensional.... Not that any consequence, logic, honesty or dignity can be expected from someone like you.

Popper didn't understand much about how real science is done. Hence he always complained about how 'irrational' real scientists behaved. (that is, in not following his prescriptions) Ironically Popper himself was just as irrational when clinging to his own untenable ideas.

That's why Imre Lakatos makes more sense than Popper. Lakatos focusses on progressing 'research programs', which are unavoidably carried by groups of scientists.

Not quite right. (before your appearance here) some scientists of note did post in this SPR. (and also in TO) Amusement value of crackpots isn't restricted to non-scientists.

Mach was a nitwit, philosophically speaking. (he originated naive positivism) Max Planck already made mincemeat of him. BTW, your idea of 'cronyism' really doesn't fit here.

But, otoh, peer review doesn't always work as desired. Whole groups may go off the rails. When that happens only funding agencies can stop them,

Jan

Actually they do. They also transmit how far off they are. (ground control tells them) It is only when they have drifted off a long way (> 100 ns iirc) that they are steered back.

Why do you still bother?

Jan

If anecdote is to be believed Hawking and Penrose were exceptions. Hawking in particular seems to have done most of his work by visualising space-time diagrams, in his mind.

There is always second-best,

Jan

And he sailed over Pacific standing on a snotter once.

My impression is that GPS satellites are constantly getting the timebase signal from ground stations, and that global positioning satellites are part of a geopositioning and geosynchrony system where the differences in their clocks and the ground's clocks vary, besides simply according to space contraction (which is always length contraction and time dilation together) then that GPS satellites vary the signal on which they broadcast, so that all the terminal receivers get a constant frequency signal, while the geosynchrony advises the JPL PPN ephemeris daily.

It's called 'Parameterized Post-Newtonian', "PPN".

So, this is for an account of "real space-contraction" then about space-contraction-linear and space-contraction-rotational, which can be made as an interpretation of GR General Relativity, explaining the things while having a global clock-hypothesis.

Tri-dimensionality is special in various examples about, for examples, crossings and knots, sharpness, then here mostly about an account that a linear continuum has infinities and infinitesimals so encoding a 3-D space into a 1-D space makes for the kind of unified holographic structure of the space, that it's natural.

With timing being a ray instead of a dimension, then about motion and change, that "geometry is motion", is actually that besides whether humans are evolved to think in spatial terms in 3-D, actually that space "is" 3-D for a reason.

Then, about matters of perspective and projection, is for the simple abstraction of an assignment of numbering for points in space to points in another dimension, "The Fourth Dimension", is simply about abstraction, while that then attaching that to "time", is particularly apropos.

Then, when getting above _that_, space _and_ time, "a fifth dimension", it's just a mathematical scratch-pad.

So, Kaluza-Klein and beyond is the usual account of "higher dimensional models of space-time", yet, nature does it in 3 (plus 1/2).

Sort of for a, "Silver Thread", and, "Golden Braid", time and space, then about a linear continuum and for the usual ideas of dimensions "curling up" or "rolling up", is the idea that a number can look like this:

x iota + y + z Iota

with iota for "infinitesimal" and Iota for "infinity", then that there's a simple sort of arithmetic about adding those and making treatment of them as vectors, componentwise, then as well about rotations how then also rotations get built among those, since, it's simply enough "rotate", the terms, then why that's particular 3-many terms is because there's only one "infitesimals" and only one "infinites" for otherwise the plain old real numbers their values.

So, that's then a "holographic" or "hologrammatic" sort of account, about the 1 <-> 3 directly, though.

Zero meters per second is infinity seconds per meter.

I have this conviction that that is exactly what is happening with quantum computing. It's time someone exposes the delusion.

Jeroen Belleman

So, with that being an empty space in a ray of time, "space-time", then there's the usual consideration of all the objects and contents in it, usually "Space-Time".

As a mental model it's minimal.

The idea then of the contents of "Space-Time" is to see the arrival of a, "tetrad of quantities". The idea is that there are four quantities, mass and charge and neutron lifetime and light's speed, say, for examples, that the reason there is a tetrad or 4-many is because it's a natural dual or complementary dual to the time's and space's three.

Then, about matter as inert, charge as restless, lifetime as enduring, and lux as fleeting, is again for the account of "geometry is motion", and usual sorts of seemingly at once profound yet meaningless accounts as "the only constant is change".

Then, making for a brief mental model of continuity and change, and about inversion and complementary duals, for example about creation and destruction or the conservation and exchange, gets to arriving at reasoning for examples about fall-gravity, Rest Exchange Momentum, and Light-Speed Rest-Frame accounts that happen to fulfill the formalisms of the inner products of usual accounts of gravity and general and special relativity.

These are often enough accounts of models of change in an open system, as "wave mechanics", then furthermore about "wave-spirals" and "spiral-waves", about line-drawing and the spiral-space-filling-curve, and about models of state, like frame-spaces and space-frames.

Thusly, there's arrived at a bit of a "Theory of Everything" from a "Theory of Nothing".

"A Theory"

It might help to realize that anything these days called "quantum computing" would better be called "simulated-quantum computing".

For example, Maugin's account of the surface acoustic wave transducer, is more-than-less a wide gate array implementing a surface acoustic wave transducer, that somebody calls a "D-Wave".

Certainly. Too many kids are getting degrees in engineering. And in sociology, filmmaking, music theory, political science, english, and probably physics.

At least many low-talent engineering grads can become sales reps or test technicians or something.

I know of one physics grad who is programming FPGAs. He's OK.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

The "digital" is eventually "analog", ....

Don't get me wrong, there are all kinds of architectures about custom logic and free-form 3-D IC's, three-dimensional integrated circuits, about things like putting rollers and shifters together or "the barrel shifter", about combining electronics and photonics, or as well heat-pipes about about any other means of conduction and radation, "systems on chip", "reversible computing", all kinds of possible microarchitectures according to materials science.

According to "quantum mechanics" its usual formalisms, it can only be "simulated". A proper "continuum mechanics" of the sub-atomic and trans-Planckian, though, that would be ultimately an "analog computer".