Prev: Geometric Motivations behind Relative Homology.?
Next: Conditions for maps f:X-->Y to "Pass to Cohomology".?
From: spudnik on 2 Aug 2010 19:03
ah, so; light is relatavistic, because
its waves "go" through no medium, or redshifts are dopplerian,
if the object is going at some fraction of lightspeed
-- not velocity --
w.r.t "free space?"

I may have muddled this, or you have.

> That's what distinguishes relativistic Doppler from the Doppler in
> medium-carried signals. Different basis, similar outcome.

thus:
the pytahgorean theorem is perfectly dimensional, as
he and I both concern ourselves with "circling," instead
of "tatragoning." that is, "Einstein's proof" via similarity,
which he probably found at the gymnasium
in Euclid, is merely diagrammatic as he gave it;
the actual construction *is* the lunes proof
(Hippocrates', I think, but different than the Oath's .-)

thus:
in spite of his slogan about phase-sppace,
Minkowski was a fantastic Nd geometer. anyway,
it's downright innumerate to worry about it,
without actually peeking at l'OEuvre de Fermatttt, but
Hipparchus' (or Hippocrates') lunes proof is all
that you need for the dimensionality of the 2d pythag. thm.,
if not the 3d pair of them (quadruplets).
the main thing, though, is that Fermat didn't have
to prove n=3, since his proof apparently applied
to all of the odd primes; only the special case
of n=4 does not fall to teh well-known lemma
for composite exponents, and this he showed,
in one of his rare expositions.

thus: too bad, the unit associated with the pound, had
to be associated with The newton -- the plagiarist,
the spook, the freemason, the corpuscular "theorist" ...

--les ducs d'oil!
http://tarpley.net/online-books/

--Light, A History!
http://wlym.com/~animations/fermat/index.html
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Geometric Motivations behind Relative Homology.?
Next: Conditions for maps f:X-->Y to "Pass to Cohomology".?