Spacetime is both continuous and discrete simultaneously and I can
prove it !


Nobody cares. I cant believe my eyes.

Look at the facts -

1) Anything can be said to exist for zero seconds. It's trivial.
2) Anything which exists for only zero seconds does not really exist.
It's trivial.

3) Max planck was almost right. Time does not cease to exist in an
absolute sense, it simply becomes unobservable.


You can easily derive that there is a sub-Planck scale realm. A
manifold of points which "appear" nonexistent, because time is
unobservable, and so those points are trivial.

Spacetime is a mixture of points which we percieve as existent, and
points which seem nonexistent relative to us. It's scalar relativity.
Simple.


You jackasses sit around scratching your butts wondering how QM could
be noncausal. It's so damned easy, simpletons! If cause and effect are
simultaneous, then they are indistinguishable. DUH !!!

OBVIOUSLY, if time cannot be observed on the quantum scale, it will
"appear" noncausal !!!


DO I HAVE TO REBUILD PHYSICS MYSELF ? WHAT DO THEY PAY YOU FOR ?? I AM
A TRASH COLLECTOR. I RIDE ON A GARBAGE TRUCK, AND U-R-2-DUMMM TO DO
YOUR JAY-OH-BEE.














PS, my SSN is the product of two primes, both greater than 160. Just
thought I'd mention it.

From Osher Doctorow

Lefty, who claims to be a trash collector, typed:

PS, my SSN is the product of two primes, both greater than 160. Just
thought I'd mention it.

See my new thread (I'll post it in a few minutes) on palindromes.

Osher Doctorow

LEFTY wrote:
Spacetime is both continuous and discrete simultaneously and I can
prove it !


Nobody cares. I cant believe my eyes.

Look at the facts -

1) Anything can be said to exist for zero seconds. It's trivial.
2) Anything which exists for only zero seconds does not really exist.
It's trivial.

3) Max planck was almost right. Time does not cease to exist in an
absolute sense, it simply becomes unobservable.


You can easily derive that there is a sub-Planck scale realm. A
manifold of points which "appear" nonexistent, because time is
unobservable, and so those points are trivial.

Spacetime is a mixture of points which we percieve as existent, and
points which seem nonexistent relative to us. It's scalar relativity.
Simple.


You jackasses sit around scratching your butts wondering how QM could
be noncausal. It's so damned easy, simpletons! If cause and effect are
simultaneous, then they are indistinguishable. DUH !!!

OBVIOUSLY, if time cannot be observed on the quantum scale, it will
"appear" noncausal !!!

This doesn't seem to even hit upon the core mystery of QM, which is
that given a system in state S, the consequent state, S', will be
determined probablistically.

What you've proposed is that, as an increment of time approaches
zero, the difference between S and S' approaches zero, in which case it
would seem that the system can make no progress whatsoever. But this is
just a classical problem which has been dealt with analytically. You
should do some research on 1st & 2nd derivatives of a function.

DO I HAVE TO REBUILD PHYSICS MYSELF ? WHAT DO THEY PAY YOU FOR ?? I AM
A TRASH COLLECTOR. I RIDE ON A GARBAGE TRUCK, AND U-R-2-DUMMM TO DO
YOUR JAY-OH-BEE.

Well first, most of the posters on this group are definitely NOT
being paid to do physics. Second, if it pleases you to rebuild physics
on your own, then by all means, go ahead. No one's stopping you. But as
with all the others who also have to rework physics all by their
lonesome selves, and who bitch interminably over their lack of well
deserved recognition by the establishment, I must ask, what is it you
really care to have? Knowledge, or fame? If the answer is knowledge,
then what are you complaining about? Just go ahead & do the physics. It
doesn't matter if everyone else recognises your genius. If the answer
is fame, then you're not really concentrating on physics.

PS, my SSN is the product of two primes, both greater than 160. Just
thought I'd mention it.

Ah, I see. The answer is fame.

-Mark Martin

LEFTY wrote:
Spacetime is both continuous and discrete simultaneously and I can
prove it !


Nobody cares. I cant believe my eyes.

Look at the facts -

1) Anything can be said to exist for zero seconds. It's trivial.
2) Anything which exists for only zero seconds does not really exist.
It's trivial. [...]

Therefore contradiction, so you can prove anything, even things which
are false, like electrons weigh 90 tons. So what?

--- Christopher Heckman

P.S. In the future, keep this @#$@#$ off sci.math, unless you have some
_real_ math involved.

From Osher Doctorow

Mark Martin typed:

If the answer is knowledge,
then what are you complaining about? Just go ahead & do the physics. It
doesn't matter if everyone else recognises your genius. If the answer
is fame, then you're not really concentrating on physics


Well said, although one could arguably speak of "self-recognized-fame"
based on one's own recognition of one's own knowledge and actions.
This gives me an idea about an opposite to a Crank list, namely a Frank
list:

Frank List Principles. A. Strive to be recognized by 0 people most
other than yourself, and as a last resort 2-5 people. There seem to
be at most 5 Creative Geniuses who are actively doing research (some
others may be inactive) at any given time, roughly speaking. B.
Strive to be a Nonmaterialist (knowledge, ethics, Spirit for those who
believe in it and don't force others to, ability to discriminate and to
integrate ("generalize correctly" in psychology)). C. Strive to be
nonviolent unless physically attacked (no fair avenging ancestors,
though). D. Strive to be interdisciplinary. E. Don't drink or take
dope since they're not compatible with "scientific lack of bias". F.
Be a Nonconformist in knowledge. G. Avoid bureaucracies like the
plague. H. Study modifying any and all scientific or mathematical
axioms including your own. I. Recognize that the difference between 1
and "2 or more" is far more important than 1 + 1 = 2. J. Relax by
hanging limp, meditating, rapid walking, running if you're healthy,
avoiding tension, etc. By the way, if everything else fails, frankly
you still have J :)

Osher Doctorow

From Osher Doctorow

Christopher Heckman typed (not referring to me, thank God):

P.S. In the future, keep this @#$@#$ off sci.math, unless you have some

_real_ math involved


I'm trying to find @#$@#$ in my mathematics dictionary, and it isn't
there. Could you speak a little louder (I'm getting hard of hearing)?
Or draw more self-explanatory hieroglyphics?

Osher

From Osher Doctorow

Oops! I meant to put Heckman's quotation in quote marks or
marks. Oh well, Groucho Marx wll have to do. Egad, what am I saying
:)

Osher

OsherD wrote:

Christopher Heckman typed (not referring to me, thank God):

P.S. In the future, keep this @#$@#$ off sci.math, unless you have some
_real_ math involved


I'm trying to find @#$@#$ in my mathematics dictionary, and it isn't
there. Could you speak a little louder (I'm getting hard of hearing)?
Or draw more self-explanatory hieroglyphics?

I can give you instructions: Eat about 10 bowls of fiber, and the next
time you go to the toilet, look into the bowl at the solid material
therein.

--- Christopher Heckman

You guys remind me of a bunch of cackling chimps.

You want to see some math ? Some physics ? I already showed you some.
It is called a "triviality", look it up on the @#@$%&@ Wikipedaeia or
whatever the hell -

You cannot argue against what I said - so you claim, incorrectly that I
am seeking fame. I have some very good reason to seek privacy, and I
could prove that too. All I want to do is getthe idea across, and you
guys just quibble like old women.

How about attacking the IDEA - IF you can please. But, you cant. You
cant find a flaw in the reasoning, and so you CRY like little babies.

I CHALLENGE you to pick out the error. COWARDS.

-------------------------------
This doesn't seem to even hit upon the core mystery of QM, which is
that given a system in state S, the consequent state, S', will be
determined probablistically.

What you've proposed is that, as an increment of time approaches
zero, the difference between S and S' approaches zero, in which case it

would seem that the system can make no progress whatsoever. But this is

just a classical problem which has been dealt with analytically. You
should do some research on 1st & 2nd derivatives of a function.
-------------------------------


QM cannot be explained by probability and statistics alone. Even
Feynman said that it dosent make any sense. See quantum eraser, double
eraser, etc. ALL of these experiments suggest dynamics in the 3rd
dimension where time is non-existent, but this cannot be done
algebraically. You cant transition from 4D to 3D smoothly, per Diff
Geom. Solution ? It is an illusion, an illusion caused by our ability
to observe time. Now THAT makes sense !

I am not reverse engineering or retrofitting Zeno's paradox !

I am saying that physics constitues models of nature which are based on
OBSERVATION. And, our ability to OBSERVE time is restricted. Time is
infinitely subdivisible, but we can only observe a limited range of
those subdivisions. The fact that there are subdivisions of time which
are unobservable immediately yields the illusion of nonexistence, and
THIS is the answer to continuity of spacetime.

There are points which appear to exist, and there are points which
really do exist but they will "appear" nonexistent.

QED already !