tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post9168095462904253372..comments2021-06-22T01:21:31.705-07:00Comments on Dark Buzz: Modifying space and timeRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-11645342827269827392013-12-16T08:55:20.775-08:002013-12-16T08:55:20.775-08:00That's right, non-Euclidean geometry was not i...That's right, non-Euclidean geometry was not initially used in Einstein's relativity, but was used in Poincare's relativity in 1905 and Minkowski's relativity in 1908. Einstein's relativity did not catch on.<br /><br />Yes, physics has other hero worship. But Einstein is by far the biggest false hero.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-89967625882003237272013-12-15T23:30:07.703-08:002013-12-15T23:30:07.703-08:00Roger,
I don't think non-Euclidean geometry wa...Roger,<br />I don't think non-Euclidean geometry was initially used in Einstein's relativity at all, and it certainly doesn't do anything but add useless complexity to the concept. Einstein was schooled by 'experts' in new maths to dress up his theory with obscurring complexity to avoid scrutiny outside of the select few who had mastered the new math. The smaller your pool of critics, the easier it is to fool them. This age old technique has been quite effective in cloaking errors and fudges for hundreds if not thousands of years, and is the primary reason modern physics can't precisely define many of the terms it wants to use so freely. If you can't define your subject or distinguish between a Concept like a mathematical point (which exists only mathematically or as an idea), and an Object like an iron atom (which exists physically, whether you are looking at it or not) you really can't do actual physics which describes with useful theory what is going on in the actual world. New and increasingly complex maths are invented every day, and all of them depend upon the same logical errors, poor definitions, and lack of any theoretical rigor. Simple gut check; if the math is all that is carrying your forces, in truth you really don't have a working theory, you have a non explanatory heuristic model, and your model is either wrong or incomplete. <br />By the way, I do enjoy reading your blog, I like that you can challenge unquestioning hero worship of physicists like Einstein. Just don't forget that the cult of personality worship which tends to hide all error did not begin or end with Albert.C.Takacsnoreply@blogger.com