Thought provoking [Archive]

spacepatriot@go.com

Aug7-04, 05:06 PM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the\nuniverse is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four\ndimensional space time.\n\nIt presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common\nmechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of\ngravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial\ndimensions.\n\nRather thought provoking\n\nhttp://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the
universe is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four
dimensional space time.

It presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common
mechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of
gravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial
dimensions.

Rather thought provoking

http://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm

Ulmo

Aug12-04, 08:29 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\n\n\nspacepatriot@go.com wrote in message news:<1b1053e2.0408061157.160de490@posting.google. com>...\n> I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the\n> universe is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four\n> dimensional space time.\n>\n> It presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common\n> mechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of\n> gravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial\n> dimensions.\n>\n> Rather thought provoking\n>\n> http://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm\n\nIt\'s not "thought provoking" since no thought went into it. This is\ntotal crackpot nonsense, like 10,000 similar crakpots on the Internet.\nIt is not even presented "in a very logical and scientific manner" as\nyou claim. If we lived in Euclidean space, with no four spatial\ndimensions and no time dimensions, the universe would be a radically\ndifferent place.\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>spacepatriot@go.com wrote in message news:<1b1053e2.0408061157.160de490@posting.google.com>...
> I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the
> universe is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four
> dimensional space time.
>
> It presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common
> mechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of
> gravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial
> dimensions.
>
> Rather thought provoking
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm

It's not "thought provoking" since no thought went into it. This is
total crackpot nonsense, like 10,000 similar crakpots on the Internet.
It is not even presented "in a very logical and scientific manner" as
you claim. If we lived in Euclidean space, with no four spatial
dimensions and no time dimensions, the universe would be a radically
different place.

FrediFizzx

Aug12-04, 08:29 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\n<spacepatriot@go.com> wrote:\n| I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the\n| universe is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four\n| dimensional space time.\n|\n| It presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common\n| mechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of\n| gravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial\n| dimensions.\n\nThis is not such a new idea. See the following link.\n\nhttp://astro.uwaterloo.ca/~wesson/home.html\n\nFrediFizzx\n\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky><spacepatriot@go.com> wrote:
| I found a rather interesting on line discussion that postulates the
| universe is composed of four spatial dimensions instead of four
| dimensional space time.
|
| It presents it in a very logical and scientific manner a common
| mechanism responsible for quantum and relativistic properties of
| gravity, mass space and time in terms of the geometry of four spatial
| dimensions.

This is not such a new idea. See the following link.

http://astro.uwaterloo.ca/~wesson/home.html

FrediFizzx

tessel@tum.bot

Aug13-04, 05:41 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Ulmo wrote:\n\n> spacepatriot@go.com wrote in message\n\n[snip]\n\n> > Rather thought provoking\n> >\n> > http://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm\n>\n> It\'s not "thought provoking" since no thought went into it. This is\n> total crackpot nonsense, like 10,000 similar crakpots on the Internet.\n\nYes, and in fact the author of this site has been posting to the\nunmoderated groups for many years, as anyone can check. But this post may\nrepresent an even more obnoxious phenomenon than Ulmo realized, since I\nsuspect that "spacepatriot" (the handle used by the author of the post)\nmay be none other than "Jeff" (the handle used by the author of the\nwebsite cited in the post)! To see why, take a moment to google for\nsimilar recent posts to other newsgroups.\n\nIn the unmoderated groups, certain cranks have long been prone to this\nkind of deceptive and manipulative behavior (e.g. masquerading as a\ndisinterested third party praising their own posts/website), and it\nis/will be a sad day when they get away with it here.\n\nCrank submissions are like spam: we can\'t prevent it, but we can urge the\nmoderators to try to implement countermeasures which might screen out most\nof it. Since cranks are presumably less adaptable than spammers, a\npragmatic approach just might enjoy some modest success, for a time.\nPerhaps concerned readers with -workable- suggestions will send them to\nthe moderators--- with due regard to the amount of mail they already have\nto deal with. "Time permitting"--- that\'s the rub, darn it!\n\nIn any event, despite the distress I share with Ulmo at the apparently\ninexorable decline in the average quality of posts here, no doubt I speak\nfor all legitimate participants here when I say that I appreciate the\nvolunteer efforts of our overworked moderators!\n\nLong live scholarship!\n\n"T. Essel" (hiding from spammers and other net nasties)\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Ulmo wrote:

> spacepatriot@go.com wrote in message

[snip]

> > Rather thought provoking
> >
> > http://home.comcast.net/~jeffocal/shadows.htm
>
> It's not "thought provoking" since no thought went into it. This is
> total crackpot nonsense, like 10,000 similar crakpots on the Internet.

Yes, and in fact the author of this site has been posting to the
unmoderated groups for many years, as anyone can check. But this post may
represent an even more obnoxious phenomenon than Ulmo realized, since I
suspect that "spacepatriot" (the handle used by the author of the post)
may be none other than "Jeff" (the handle used by the author of the
website cited in the post)! To see why, take a moment to google for
similar recent posts to other newsgroups.

In the unmoderated groups, certain cranks have long been prone to this
kind of deceptive and manipulative behavior (e.g. masquerading as a
disinterested third party praising their own posts/website), and it
is/will be a sad day when they get away with it here.

Crank submissions are like spam: we can't prevent it, but we can urge the
moderators to try to implement countermeasures which might screen out most
of it. Since cranks are presumably less adaptable than spammers, a
pragmatic approach just might enjoy some modest success, for a time.
Perhaps concerned readers with -workable- suggestions will send them to
the moderators--- with due regard to the amount of mail they already have
to deal with. "Time permitting"--- that's the rub, darn it!

In any event, despite the distress I share with Ulmo at the apparently
inexorable decline in the average quality of posts here, no doubt I speak
for all legitimate participants here when I say that I appreciate the
volunteer efforts of our overworked moderators!

Long live scholarship!

"T. Essel" (hiding from spammers and other net nasties)