Fallacy , Space can be bent , warped or contorted .

river · Sunday at 1:53 AM

(Q) said:
Then, its the thing you waste writing them.

Not to you .

Write4U · Sunday at 3:33 AM

DaveC426913 said:
How do you know? Can you "see" lines out in space "away from physical objects"? How do you do this if "you don't need math "?

Einstein showed us a straight line that presented as "longer curved line' to the observer in the accelerating elevator.
It is how he proved the appearance of gravity.

river · Sunday at 4:02 AM

Space its self though can not be shaped into any form . By any thing .

billvon · Sunday at 6:20 AM

river said:
Hence neither can be " warped " , bent etc . Hence Nor create a " fabric " . Of any kind . Physically .

There's no literal fabric. It's a simile to help explain the concept.

Write4U · Sunday at 10:45 AM

river said:
Space its self though can not be shaped into any form . By any thing

Apparently it can, despite your protestations. The theory of CDT (Causal Dynamical Triangulation) is a serious and logical theory about how spacetime fabric itself unfolds in an essentially curved fractal manner.

Fractals in theoretical cosmology

Since 1986, quite a large number of different cosmological theories exhibiting fractal properties have been proposed. While Linde's theory shows fractality at scales likely larger than the observable universe, theories like causal dynamical triangulation [9] and the asymptotic safety approach to quantum gravity [10] are fractal at the opposite extreme, in the realm of the ultra-small near the Planck scale. These recent theories of quantum gravity describe a fractal structure for spacetime itself, and suggest that the dimensionality of space evolves with time. Specifically, they suggest that reality is 2D at the Planck scale, and that spacetime gradually becomes 4D at larger scales.

The work of Connes and physicist Carlo Rovelli [12] suggests that time is an emergent property or arises naturally in this formulation, whereas in causal dynamical triangulation[9] choosing those configurations where adjacent building blocks share the same direction in time is an essential part of the "recipe."

Both approaches suggest that the fabric of space itself is fractal, however.

more... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_cosmology

Write4U · Monday at 3:52 AM

Can someone

Write4U said:
Einstein showed us a straight line that presented as "longer curved line' to the observer in the accelerating elevator.
It is how he proved the appearance of gravity.

Can someone explain this graph to me, please. It seems to be in error.
I always thought the bending was not toward the sun from outside the cone , but around the sun from inside the cone.

Not this.

But this:

What am I missing?

James R · Monday at 4:04 AM

Write4U said:
What am I missing?

Nothing. The top diagram is incorrect.

DaveC426913 · Monday at 2:24 PM

Write4U said:
View attachment 6720

Where did you find this illustration?

exchemist · Monday at 2:38 PM

DaveC426913 said:
Where did you find this illustration?

Probably copilot offered it to him. But indeed, from where does it come? There is what looks like cartoon cat symbol in the upper right corner. But that doesn’t mean anything to me, I’m afraid.

DaveC426913 · Monday at 2:54 PM

exchemist said:
Probably copilot offered it to him. But indeed, from where does it come? There is what looks like cartoon cat symbol in the upper right corner. But that doesn’t mean anything to me, I’m afraid.

Yeah. It's (how do you say...) bollocks.

Another win for internet misinformation.

A point going to Write4U for having the wherewithal to question it rather than just mindlessly posting it. Didn't know he had it in him.

exchemist · Monday at 3:18 PM

DaveC426913 said:
Yeah. It's (how do you say...) bollocks.

Another win for internet misinformation.

A point going to Write4U for having the wherewithal to question it rather than just mindlessly posting it. Didn't know he had it in him.

Yes I agree, both about the bollocks (or ballocks) and about Write4U. Evidently he has not completely outsourced his mind on this occasion.

Write4U · Monday at 5:20 PM

DaveC426913 said:
Where did you find this illustration?

Post #82 here
A still capture from the Youtube of Man in the Elevator

Write4U · Monday at 5:22 PM

DaveC426913 said:
A point going to Write4U for having the wherewithal to question it rather than just mindlessly posting it. Didn't know he had it in him.

Give it time.

DaveC426913 · Monday at 5:26 PM

Write4U said:
Give it time.

Dude it's been 13 years. It's been plenty time enough.

exchemist · Monday at 6:04 PM

Write4U said:
Post #82 here
A still capture from the Youtube of Man in the Elevator

Thus demonstrating what some of us have always maintained, that YouTube is full of shit and a useless place to go to learn science, unless you check the reputation of the author of the video.

DaveC426913 · Monday at 6:39 PM

exchemist said:
Thus demonstrating what some of us have always maintained, that YouTube is full of shit and a useless place to go to learn science, unless you check the reputation of the author of the video.

A simple check of the comments is an even faster way to dismiss a sketchy video. This video has zero comments*, despite having been live for six months.

I am pretty sure the whole thing was AI-generated. And, as we know, AI routinely just makes shite up.

*OK, now it has exactly one: me commenting to say it's full of shite

Write4U · Monday at 8:46 PM

DaveC426913 said:
A simple check of the comments is an even faster way to dismiss a sketchy video. This video has zero comments*, despite having been live for six months.

I used the Youtube only to demonstrate the Einstein thought experiment.

Any additional information was added by the poster and I caught the error in it. What exactly is the problem here?

Pinball1970 · Monday at 9:03 PM

Write4U said:
I used the Youtube only to demonstrate the Einstein thought experiment.

Any additional information was added by the poster and I caught the error in it. What exactly is the problem here?

He noted your catch, the fault was the vid itself.

Write4U · Monday at 9:10 PM

DaveC426913 said:
*OK, now it has exactly one: me commenting to say it's full of shite

Just a moment. Are you saying that non-AI generated human messages are not full of shite? Tell me the difference.
After all, AI gets its information from human sources.

But I have read that putting AI to work on well defined problems such as antivirals and it will come up with new solutions in a much shorter time than by human trials. I believe the new COVID antivirals are all AI generated.

Researchers validate a new class of AI-generated Covid antivirals

In a new study, researchers at IBM and Oxford University show that new antivirals can be designed, made, and potentially validated in months, a breakthrough that could get lifesaving drugs to people faster in the next crisis.

Researchers validate new AI-generated Covid antivirals

iBM and Oxford University show that new antivirals can be designed, made, and potentially validated in months.

research.ibm.com

But that is off topic.

Write4U · Monday at 9:32 PM

Pinball1970 said:
He noted your catch, the fault was the vid itself.

I agree. That is why I asked the question to separate that closing addition from the main theme. You yourself approved of the elevator sequence.

But I don't like these sweeping statements about the uselessness of AI. It's here to stay, and it will rule the information sharing world.
It is up to the user to make judicious use of the resource, which I try to confirm with quotes and reference to authorship..

After all, book libraries are also full of shite, that why we are constantly fighting for freedom of speech, because there is always someone who wants to ban books or information.

Does anyone here advocate for censorship, banning, or for peer review to determine its scientific value?

Fallacy , Space can be bent , warped or contorted .

Just this guy, you know?