you started nice
then less convincing

you started about how little we know! that is the right way
to present the situation
and you ended with a 'Mandelbrot set'
there you blew it!!

you can t expect some magic darn to solve anything
it is too complex to try and sum it up with one theory!!
so that attempt to solve anything with just one 'blow'
is a false approach.

2 mathematics by itself cannot do any breakthrough

the breakthroughs will be by physics thinking
and by trial and errors again and again!1
step by step along a long period

yet the key for all that is much less arrogance
and much more modesty!!

ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------------

Traveler wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 09:57:30 -0800, "
wrote:


Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Which relativists have you been talking too? Watch out for relativists
that have straw sticking out of their clothing.

Most of them on the sci.physics groups claim that science (not just
physics) is about the how of things, not the why. This is common
knowledge.

What's the difference? In solving most questions, the real difficulty
is in actually identifying the exact question. Three letter words like
'how' or 'why' don't really describe the question very well..

Anyway I like the why questions, especially in relativity. Ask away,
please!



I think they should all be hung by their
[expletive] gonads as an example to the younger generation.

Why?

Why? Because 'why?' is the most important question of them
all.

That is unrelated to your suggestion of torture; a worse example for
the younger generation is hard to think of.

What are you, autistic?

Another non sequitur? The answer: maybe so.


Ask any child. If you don't know the why of a phenomenon, you are
ignorant and have no real understanding. ahahaha...


Then we are all ignorant and have no real understanding. Why? Because
there is always a further "why" question that can be asked after every
answer. Why? Because that is the nature of comprehension. Why?
Because no logical statement or thought can stand on its own without
some pre-existing context in which to understand it. Why? Because
otherwise there is no criteria of understanding or not understanding.
Why? [etc.]

[that]
fails to take into account that not every cause is necessarily an
effect in need of a further cause. It also fails to realize that even
a shalow causal understanding is infinitely better than a mere
non-causal description.

I thought it emphasized that..

For example, it is much more useful for
medical science to know the immediate cause (a given pathogen) of a
disease than not to know.

Good example.

One does not need to have an answer for
every causal mechanism in the causal chain for progress to be made.

Very true!

What is unnerving is for some ass kisser in the physics community to
sit on his/her stupid ass and refuse to ask why. Worse, they do it for
no other reason than to avoid showing their ****ing ignorance. It is
elistist and narcissistic to an absurd ****ing degree.


I agree.

Yeah, I say hang them publically by their ****ing gonads. ahahaha...
AHAHAHA... ahahaha...


I prefer to ignore them, but whatever gets you off..

-shevek

wrote:

Traveler wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 09:57:30 -0800, "
wrote:


Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Which relativists have you been talking too? Watch out for relativists
that have straw sticking out of their clothing.

Most of them on the sci.physics groups claim that science (not just
physics) is about the how of things, not the why. This is common
knowledge.

What's the difference? In solving most questions, the real difficulty
is in actually identifying the exact question. Three letter words like
'how' or 'why' don't really describe the question very well..

Anyway I like the why questions, especially in relativity. Ask away,
please!

Ok...

tau = t*sqrt(1-v²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-u²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-w²/c²)
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)


Why did Einstein say
eta = y,
zeta = z?


Androcles.

Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

The more we think we understand, the more we find out we do not
understand, and not only do we not understand, we do not even know how
much it is we don't understand.

This is basically true.

Its not just physics either, just look at biochemistry and genetics.
They thought sequencing the genome would help solve all our questions,
but all it has done is not only not answer the questions we had, but
increased the number of questions for which we don't have answers and
do not look like having any answers to any time soon.

Absolutely- that's what great science is all about; finding new
questions to ask. Then we get to work and find answers to the
questions.

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Who says so?

I think they should all be hung by their
****ing gonads as an example to the younger generation. ahahaha...
AHAHAHA... Why? Because 'why?' is the most important question of them
all.

Why?

Hi whisper555, Speaking of the obfuscation called M_Theory,
You concluded:

We don't know anything.
...
we still cannot point to that one thing that says
this is what makes it all work.

It seems everything from physics, chemistry and biology, the whole
universe in fact, is like some giant Mandelbrot set, with no end.

I don't know about you but sometimes I wish I knew less.
Everything... including the universe... is like a match burning out,
dissipating. Entropy always goes up in the end... heat dissipates.

Randomness is naught but the byproduct of unknowns,
making things seem like a casino... where the house always wins in the end.

Gravity is naught but left over density from the start of the big bang,
sometimes winning in the Short_Term... consuming... glomming on...
but always losing in the Long_Term... dissipating. Humans are like that too.

Meaning belongs to me, it's what matters to me, here and now.
Yet it seems like Over_Glorified inanity to others.

God is relative. For example, I'm God to a rat in my maze,
and, likewise, I'm a rat in my God's maze... controlled by him/it.
Speaking of _Him_, it's hubris to assume sentience requires liquid water.

Despite many unknowns, rest assured that
entropy, dissipation, devolution, consumption, etc. is spatial,
the forth spatial dimension, static and parochial.

Liquid water is just a density, a place in Space_Time_Entropy,
it's nothing special... the Anthropic_Principle is Human_Centric,
recycled hubris from the ancient days of Earth_Centric cosmology.

It seems everything from physics, chemistry and biology, the whole
universe in fact, is like some giant Mandelbrot set, with no end.

*****************

Perfect! Cybernetic self-organizing form repeating from level to
level, only the content varying. Now you have it.

Traveler, software mogul, president, ceo, and all one employee got
is brownnose in a sling:

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

The more we think we understand, the more we find out we do not
understand, and not only do we not understand, we do not even know how
much it is we don't understand.

This is basically true.

Its not just physics either, just look at biochemistry and genetics.
They thought sequencing the genome would help solve all our questions,
but all it has done is not only not answer the questions we had, but
increased the number of questions for which we don't have answers and
do not look like having any answers to any time soon.

Absolutely- that's what great science is all about; finding new
questions to ask. Then we get to work and find answers to the
questions.

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Hey, lois - _why_ your are an idiot is of no concern to physicists nor
would I expect relativity to predict how much more stupid you can become.
The fact that you are is proof that devolution occurs, even if
infrequently. Try asking in one of the biology newsgroups, since the
most likely answer is that your genetic code is nothing but the junk DNA.
They might even be able to tell you what species you might be in
the genus, brokenus toasterovenae.


I think they should all be hung by their
****ing gonads as an example to the younger generation. ahahaha...
AHAHAHA... Why? Because 'why?' is the most important question of them
all. Ask any child. If you don't know the why of a phenomenon, you are
ignorant and have no real understanding. ahahaha...

Well, if you work real hard and get a lot of help, you might be able
rise above your deficit to reach igorance.

Androcles wrote:
wrote:

Traveler wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 09:57:30 -0800, "
wrote:


Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Which relativists have you been talking too? Watch out for relativists
that have straw sticking out of their clothing.

Most of them on the sci.physics groups claim that science (not just
physics) is about the how of things, not the why. This is common
knowledge.

What's the difference? In solving most questions, the real difficulty
is in actually identifying the exact question. Three letter words like
'how' or 'why' don't really describe the question very well..

Anyway I like the why questions, especially in relativity. Ask away,
please!

Ok...

tau = t*sqrt(1-v²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-u²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-w²/c²)
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)


Why did Einstein say
eta = y,
zeta = z?



Because he also said
u=w=0

wrote in message
ups.com...

Androcles wrote:
wrote:

Traveler wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 09:57:30 -0800, "
wrote:


Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed
to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Which relativists have you been talking too? Watch out for
relativists
that have straw sticking out of their clothing.

Most of them on the sci.physics groups claim that science (not just
physics) is about the how of things, not the why. This is common
knowledge.

What's the difference? In solving most questions, the real difficulty
is in actually identifying the exact question. Three letter words like
'how' or 'why' don't really describe the question very well..

Anyway I like the why questions, especially in relativity. Ask away,
please!

Ok...

tau = t*sqrt(1-v ²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-u²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-w²/c²)
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)


Why did Einstein say
eta = y,
zeta = z?



Because he also said
u=w=0

Oh... I thought that the diagonal of my bedroom was sqrt(x²+y²+z²),
I didn't know I was not allow to shine light into the spider's lairs.
Dang, another cobweb in the corner... I'll give the foxy cleaning
lady a call, she'll fix it.
Actually Einstein said
V = (v+w)/(1+vw/c²),
which is kinda deliberately blowing smoke for his mirror trick.
He never said w = 0.

Another 'why' question...

Why did Einstein think he could make a moron and lying toad out of Bilge,
Roberts, Baez and shevek4, all of whom know everything, if he couldn't make
an honest fool out of me, who only knows some things?
You have warts, shevek4, and your wooden nose has grown. The princess will
not kiss you. Maybe you'll get one of Cinderella's ugly sisters for
Christmas, although I have heard from Sue that they are bull dykes a little
Dutch boy put his finger in.
Androcles.

Androcles wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Androcles wrote:
wrote:

Traveler wrote:
On 15 Dec 2005 09:57:30 -0800, "
wrote:


Traveler wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:29:58 -0500, Andy Resnick
wrote:

wrote:

According to relativists, there is one question one is not allowed
to
ask in physics: 'Why?'

Which relativists have you been talking too? Watch out for
relativists
that have straw sticking out of their clothing.

Most of them on the sci.physics groups claim that science (not just
physics) is about the how of things, not the why. This is common
knowledge.

What's the difference? In solving most questions, the real difficulty
is in actually identifying the exact question. Three letter words like
'how' or 'why' don't really describe the question very well..

Anyway I like the why questions, especially in relativity. Ask away,
please!

Ok...

tau = t*sqrt(1-v ²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-u²/c²)
tau = t*sqrt(1-w²/c²)
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)


Why did Einstein say
eta = y,
zeta = z?



Because he also said
u=w=0

Oh... I thought that the diagonal of my bedroom was sqrt(x²+y²+z²),
I didn't know I was not allow to shine light into the spider's lairs.

Shine away. Tell us when you have some luck shining the light on
spider's lairs with bedroom diagonals on the order of the Plank length,
or spider's lairs which move through your bedroom at near the speed of
light.

Dang, another cobweb in the corner... I'll give the foxy cleaning
lady a call, she'll fix it.
Actually Einstein said
V = (v+w)/(1+vw/c²),
which is kinda deliberately blowing smoke for his mirror trick.
He never said w = 0.

Another 'why' question...

Why did Einstein think he could make a moron and lying toad out of Bilge,
Roberts, Baez and shevek4, all of whom know everything, if he couldn't make
an honest fool out of me, who only knows some things?

If you believe we know everything, you are indeed a fool


You have warts, shevek4, and your wooden nose has grown.

I expected the nose to grow when I decelerated but I wish Einstein had
warned me about thes ewarts. .

The princess will
not kiss you.

Thank god for pr0n.

Maybe you'll get one of Cinderella's ugly sisters for
Christmas, although I have heard from Sue that they are bull dykes a little
Dutch boy put his finger in.

And merry Christmas to you too, enjoy Santa's lap - shevek4