my friend, I am old, time is very precious, thinking takes time. since what you call "frame of reference" is nothing, there is nothign to say. one moment your frame of reference is composed by property of Venus, its mass, it gravitational pull und so weiter, next moment the frame of reference is a form of "reasoning" (whatever that is) or even worse the framework, I suppose the Calabi-Yau [is that what you call frame of reference] to talk about brane theory if you want to understand I humbly suggest you use your brain, instead of spouting arrogant bullshit. All the best On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Eric Yost wrote: > >>I think what is needed is steep increase in the amount of fluid > > > As you suggest. More fluids, more blood to the brain. Focusing the few > effective neuronal networks left. > > Now, out of courtesy, having followed all your prescriptions but the > enema (lack of equipment, lack of motivation) please tell me why my > track of argument is so wrongheaded? > > I want to understand. The best way I know to elicit your response in > this situation is to ask questions. I understand that complicated > mathematics surpasses our ability to visualize its implications. Yet is > this form of understanding (working on 11-dimensional problems) not > carried out in a particular frame of reference, i.e., mathematical > reasoning? > > > Eric > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > off address: #201 West Building, Philosophy, Duke University box 90743, Durham, NC 27708 home ph#: [1] 9196881856 cellph#: [1[] 9195997065 (voicemail is available on said numbers) email palma@xxxxxxxx ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html