[geocentrism] Re: Earth gravity static or time dependent?
- From: "philip madsen" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:02:42 +1000
why they knew about air/ breathing...it’s the same thing, and you are
attempting in essence to argue that since there is no meaningfull
understanding, thus proof that there is nothing meaningful to understand....?
Allen
I understand i think? what you are saying Allen.. But why resort to way out
quantum physics of Planck, who uses his own units to explain evolution via a
big bang. Math is a great and necessary tool of the engineer,mechanic, but I
do not accept it when it is used as a means of supporting invention (ideas) ..
which quantum mechanics are.. inventions.. Imagined inventions.. like worm
holes for intergalactic instantaneous transportation.
Lets get down to specifics.
You said,
First i was alluding to the theoretical construct based on the calculation of
plank "absolutes"....this is a reasonable "starting point"...if for no other
reason then there is no other viable alternative...
You should be able to explain to me in a single paragraph of a few sentences
what YOU understand in practical terms what is "theoretical construct based
on the calculation of plank "absolutes".
with specific explanation of these absolutes.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Earth gravity static or time dependent?
Philip,
What i think you fail to fully appreciate is that all properties even the
definitions of the ones you address have no intrinsic meaning eternal of a
relationship to something else.... context is everything.....in the same way
that atmospheric pressure, generally, can not be perceived it is the "natural
state". It is only by showing a relationships to some other value(s) that it
has any meaning and those values only have any meaning in context with
others....just because fold did not perceive the pressure of air 600 years ago
does not mean it had no pressure it only means that a meaningful relationship
had not yet been established.....finding the right "meaningful" relationships
is the whole point of these discussion on the aether’s pressure.....we don’t
have those or a meaningful relationship yet.....THAT’S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT.... you cant say that since it does not conform to known
relationships that it therfore has no pressure anymore then it would have been
correct for those folk 600 yeas ago, who knew what pressure was to state that
the air has no pressure...why they knew about air/ breathing...it’s the same
thing, and you are attempting in essence to argue that since there is no
meaningfull understanding, thus proof that there is nothing meaningful to
understand....?
Other related posts:
