On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:01:07 -0700 (PDT), Benj <bjacoby@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Aug 6, 8:23 pm, Aetherist <TheAether...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> > VERY interesting hint!
>> > Obviously most of the people posting here don't have a clue what we
>> > are talking about!
>>
>> That's not really true, however most don't give a hoot about trying
>> to visualize such things. The mathematics is ALL that matters.
>
> Are you saying that they do know what we are talking about...
No, I'm saying that they don't, and don't care to. Much Llike Sheldon on
the TV comedy 'Big Bang Theory'. They 'think' they know all that there
is to know by being able to utilize the mathematical quantifications.
And also, like the character Sheldon, their mega-egos don't allow them
to even consider things that they have already decided are wrong.
>... but are pretending to not have a clue for their own purposes? Yeah,
> could be. Their posts clearly are not following the discussion,
In their minds, your ideas are wrong at worst, irrelevant at best...
Mostly they chime in here in an attempt dissuade you and others from
persuing this train of thought.
> however. >Are you saying "mathematics is all that matters" or are you
> saying "mathematics is all that matters TO THEM"! I'd accept the latter
> as true.
All that matters to them, of course.
>> I think its left brain - right brain thing. Right brain types need to
>> visualize to own it. Tesla and Faraday are examples of these types.
>> You still do need the math to quantify things (although Tesla and
>> Faraday did wonders without it).
>
> Yes I do understand the connection between art and science, between
> vision and inspiration as opposed to mechanical understanding of
> mathematical mechanics. Since Tesla and Faraday manged to "invent the
> 20th century" without abstruse mathematics, clearly as I indicated
> before it is "point of view" that is the essence of the "big" concepts
> of science and not detailed understandings of esoteric mathematical
> systems. The latter may be impressive to those who do NOT understand
> those esoteric systems, but I'm more impressed by a new "point of
> view" that suddenly opens vast vistas that nobody had guessed before
> were there. Obviously Tesla and Faraday were two who did that. Sure
> "quantification" is good, but what is it without the proper "point of
> view"? It is just a bunch of busy-work.
It's not art per-se, it how the brain is wired. I've often wondered
how those that actually believe that science can only be accomplished
by mathematical expression reconcile the startling achievements of
those like Tesla for example. Farady was derided by colleages for
his inability to express his ideas mathematically. How rude!
However, there is a problem. Telsa was mostly unable to adequately
communicate much of his inherent knowledge to others. This is where
mathematical quantification comes in. Faraday had Maxwell to accomplish
this for him. This is a perfect example of synergy.
As for the aether, try looking into super-solids. Therein lies the path
to understanding. Below is a short list of some of my past efforts in
this area.
http://www.mountainman.com.au/index_ps.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/bc2bcdc1adf9cffd?hl=en&dmode=source
Regards,
|
