What are space and time? [Logic]

Prev: NP+complete-problem navigation, search In computational complexity theory, the complexity class NP-complete (abbreviated NP-C or NPC), is a class of problems having two properties: * It is in the set of NP (nondeterministic polynomial time) pr
Next: Continuity and Uncountability

From: Huang on 18 Jul 2010 20:38

On Jul 18, 5:05 pm, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> In article
> <7d088226-4fba-40b8-9336-70e962292...(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 18, 11:05 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <28e13431-8e49-4b89-bef7-d7a5af5ed...(a)t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jul 18, 9:10 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <82f51801-6ce2-41d7-a3a1-f42ad2624...(a)d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > [1] Relativity
> > > > > > > [2] HUP
> > > > > > > [3] WP-Duality
> > > > > > > [4] A correct understanding of causality
> > > > > > > [5] A correct understanding of continuity of spacetime
> > > > > > > [6] An a-priori understanding of why we have such a thing as Planck
> > > > > > > Length
> > > > > > > [7] A correct understanding of order/disorder
> > > > > > > [8] A better understanding of paradox and it's signifigance in
> > > > > > > physics
>
> > > > > > Also forgot to mention perhaps the most important
>
> > > > > > [9] Conservation. I can explain conservation in a way that you've
> > > > > > never heard before because scientists are dum. I can explain
> > > > > > conservation without resorting to a magic wand.
>
> > > > > > You guys do nonstandard physics like Jacpaints pictures,
> > > > > > here's a clue: Jello dont stick to the wall.
>
> > > > > You are sooooo superior. And you will be obsolete without knowing it.-
> > > > > Hide
> > > > > quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > If you say so pal - those are your words, not mine.
>
> > > Consider the trap of pride, a lack of self-criticism and skepticism.- Hide
> > > quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Consider making a valid rebuttal, attacking the points of my claims
> > instead of making failed attempts at psychoanalysis. One broken tool
> > cannot fix another.
>
> > Where are the flaws in what I say ? And if you think that you can read
> > my mind, then perhaps we can do a little experiment to confirm that
> > you have the telepathic abilities which you seem to imply.
>
> IMHO, you are on the wrong track, which is to say the conventional
> interpretation of space/time fails if one uses conventional language.

That is what Kant said almost verbatim.

> Consider time as information. Issues of dimensions are leveled. No
> delusions of dimensions. No phantom of space. Just pure information that
> humankind can only begin to understand as an abstraction. Time/Space has
> no serious relationship to human perception. It is abstract, mathematic.- Hide quoted text -

That's nonsense that even Kant would laugh at. If space is just
abstract then the whole universe is just one big fantasy in someone's
head ?

From: Huang on 18 Jul 2010 22:40

On Jul 18, 7:38 pm, Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 18, 5:05 pm, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <7d088226-4fba-40b8-9336-70e962292...(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 18, 11:05 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <28e13431-8e49-4b89-bef7-d7a5af5ed...(a)t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 18, 9:10 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote:
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > <82f51801-6ce2-41d7-a3a1-f42ad2624...(a)d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > > Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > [1] Relativity
> > > > > > > > [2] HUP
> > > > > > > > [3] WP-Duality
> > > > > > > > [4] A correct understanding of causality
> > > > > > > > [5] A correct understanding of continuity of spacetime
> > > > > > > > [6] An a-priori understanding of why we have such a thing as Planck
> > > > > > > > Length
> > > > > > > > [7] A correct understanding of order/disorder
> > > > > > > > [8] A better understanding of paradox and it's signifigance in
> > > > > > > > physics
>
> > > > > > > Also forgot to mention perhaps the most important
>
> > > > > > > [9] Conservation. I can explain conservation in a way that you've
> > > > > > > never heard before because scientists are dum. I can explain
> > > > > > > conservation without resorting to a magic wand.
>
> > > > > > > You guys do nonstandard physics like Jacpaints pictures,
> > > > > > > here's a clue: Jello dont stick to the wall.
>
> > > > > > You are sooooo superior. And you will be obsolete without knowing it.-
> > > > > > Hide
> > > > > > quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > If you say so pal - those are your words, not mine.
>
> > > > Consider the trap of pride, a lack of self-criticism and skepticism..- Hide
> > > > quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Consider making a valid rebuttal, attacking the points of my claims
> > > instead of making failed attempts at psychoanalysis. One broken tool
> > > cannot fix another.
>
> > > Where are the flaws in what I say ? And if you think that you can read
> > > my mind, then perhaps we can do a little experiment to confirm that
> > > you have the telepathic abilities which you seem to imply.
>
> > IMHO, you are on the wrong track, which is to say the conventional
> > interpretation of space/time fails if one uses conventional language.
>
> That is what Kant said almost verbatim.
>
> > Consider time as information. Issues of dimensions are leveled. No
> > delusions of dimensions. No phantom of space. Just pure information that
> > humankind can only begin to understand as an abstraction. Time/Space has
> > no serious relationship to human perception. It is abstract, mathematic..- Hide quoted text -
>
> That's nonsense that even Kant would laugh at. If space is just
> abstract then the whole universe is just one big fantasy in someone's
> head ?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Very surprised that you didnt press me to validate even a single claim
among the many I have made above. You are all really lousy scientists,
and probably havent been laid in years.

From: Sam Wormley on 18 Jul 2010 23:24

On 7/18/10 7:50 AM, Huang wrote:
> Time and length are the same thing. They are just dimensions.

You are quite wrong. Look up the differences between space-like
dimensions and time-like dimensions.

From: Sam Wormley on 18 Jul 2010 23:25

On 7/18/10 8:48 AM, Huang wrote:
> Conservation. I can explain conservation in a way that you've
> never heard before because scientists are dum. I can explain
> conservation without resorting to a magic wand.
>

I'm not surprised.

From: Michael Gordge on 19 Jul 2010 05:26

On Jul 19, 7:53 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> Yes,

But you are uncertain that it did make any sense to you?

MG