On May 18, 4:22 am, Mike wrote:
On May 15, 8:04 pm, JanPB wrote:

No, it's the same metric in both cases, e.g. in the plane the
following are equal:

dx^2 + dy^2

and:

dr^2 + r^2 dtheta^2

...where x = r cos(theta) and y = r sin(theta) (polar coordinates).

What KW is saying, which is obvious to a 10 years old buy NOT TO YOU,
it's that the metric, without the corresponding set, does not specify
a geometry.

Yes, a metric without a set of coordinate system cannot possibly
describe the geometry. Thank you. This is indeed something a 10-year
old kid learning geometry would have no problem understanding this.
These matheMagicians practice the dark side of mathematics.

YOU ASSUME a priori --- somethign that he does not --- that if someone
tells you the metric is:

dr^2 + r^2 dtheta^2

then you know that:

x = r cos(theta) and y = r sin(theta)

Once again, you are correct. Thanks for pointing this one out. It is
his priori that is confusing himself.

Although this is a trivial example you presented and in most cases
someone will assume that, he is saying that in general, without the
coordinate transformation to (x,y), given the above metric, you cannot
deduce it is equivalent to dx^2 + dy^2.

I am jumping for joy. Someone finally understands what I have been
saying in the past two years.

I think it is obvious that you manipulate words in a way to suit you.
You distort other peoples arguments and you present trivial examples
that do not correspond to the original problem posed.

What do you expect someone who worships the nonsense of GR and SR.
shrug

Hilbert, Klein, and the rest all knew the field equations yield an
infinite number of solutions. Being very smart, they just walked away
from it. That left Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar
to carry the banner to accept all credit that is not anything
representing his work.

You, PD, Roberts, Carlipp and other not worth mentioning all exhibit
the same exact pattern of behavior.

From the posts I have seen among all these professors. The following
are the profiles I have compiled of them.

** Professor Carlip is the type that he’d rather cease to exist
before accepting what he and others have been taught was total garbage
right from the very start. Don’t expect him to offer any comments.

** Professor Roberts on the other hand will listen to arguments. He
is beginning to show signs of defection from the camp of Einstein
Dingleberries. However, he must be very careful doing that because of
his new job. I have no doubt he will publish something posthumously
to clear up his position just like Copernicus or go public in the last
moments of his productive life just like Constantine accepted
Christianity at his deathbed.

** Professor Drape is very mentally challenged. I don’t think he
knows what he is teaching is lying.

I wonder if behind all these nicknames there is just one person, or
several persons instructred by the same person on how to act.

Remember, a 10 year old understands you are wrong. How long are you
going to play this game?

Mr. Bielawski will retreat back in his fat castle in the air until the
sheriff to come to kick him out. shrug