tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post9010847381718900140..comments2021-01-15T10:36:20.149-08:00Comments on Dark Buzz: Extraordinary pages in the history of thoughtRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-53025058798138146422015-11-24T06:39:03.171-08:002015-11-24T06:39:03.171-08:00Roger,
Non-Euclidean geometry is logically depende...Roger,<br />Non-Euclidean geometry is logically dependent upon Euclidean geometry. The converse is not also true. Non-Euclidean geometry does not supplant or replace Euclidean geometry. <br /><br /> As for the statement <br />" But they found a new world, a geometry in which there are infinitely many lines parallel to a given line and passing through a given point; in which the sum of the angles in a triangle is less than two right angles; and which is nevertheless free of contradiction..."<br /><br /> Sounds about as useful as MWI to me. You can get any answer you like, which what makes it pretty useless too. If you can bend the meanings of words to this point where a line isn't a line and a triangle is no longer a triangle, why yes, you can pretty much make any claim you like re-defining a line as a squiggle and claim a triangle can tap dance I suppose. <br /><br />"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."<br /><br />Maybe Lincoln knew something Minkowski and Poincare did not.<br /> <br /><br /> CFTnoreply@blogger.com