A picture tells more than a thousand words. Like reverse engineering a murder case by suspect Mother Nature? Or suspect Our Father or was it ghostly Cosmos? The Holy Trinity of all three then?

A picture tells more than a thousand words. Like reverse engineering a murder case by suspect Mother Nature? Or suspect Our Father or was it ghostly Cosmos? The Holy Trinity of all three then?

· Permalink

Set Theory is not about putting things in boxes. It’s a theory inspired by categorizing things simultaneously in several or even many or even infinitely many ways. Boole showed that is was just logic.

· Permalink

Not when you assume per Grand Postulate that there are only four dimensions to reality. 3D space and relative movement of at least two atomos that might have different algorithms of deformity etc. requiring with say only two particles a chess clock to measure time. Topology with more dimensions is nice but not to describe the deepest forms of reality. Then indeed we only have local boxes with elements as atomos moving in them. The elements as an infinite amount of atomos don’t have a box. First the postulates in physics then the axioms of mathematics of which you need five axioms for otherwise plucking low hanging fruit by taking short cuts and ending up in Alice in Wonderland. As Louis Carroll told you and Einstein as well God doesn’t play dice. He plays music on the local box and seems for us to play dice.

· Permalink

I don’t believe Einstein. The experimental evidence says he was wrong. Why should I believe Ris? He knows even less maths and has even less means to judge the evidence. Bayes says that Einstein was wrong!

· Permalink

Well, why believe Ris, you don’t have to believe me as a person. Just study the drawings as a dynamic cartoon and tell me where that isn’t to be described in geometric ergo mathematical terms? Or where any of it infringes on any observed data that has been put forward as a geometric dynamical picture. My model fits all across the board like a glove. As it should. Problem is that logic sec, or algebra sec or the English language sec can prove anything to be consistent as long as you don’t demand integral consistency. My model nowhere infringes on any logic or data beknown to me. Hence I can justly claim proven best practice. As you indeed know a physicist posed data that I hadn’t taken into account. Remodeled a bit and bingo it fits there as well. Same goes as said for an experienced nurse with a degree spotting no inconsistencies on the Block model. Well then, where are there any inconsistencies in data or logic or any proven to be integral model integrating Newton to GR and QM and might I add the order function of all DNA life?

· Permalink

By the way this is the only chance humanity has in truly eradicating poverty and thus preventing war. Globally even and fast for it is hypnotical robotics.

· Permalink

*it was

· Permalink

· Permalink

· Permalink

· Permalink

· Permalink