Originally posted by KellyJayit is not that you disagree with us, it is the way you disagree with us. if we make a claim in a subject you haven't done sufficient research in, then it is reasonable for us to expect to research that subject and then find flaws in our thinking. not use unrelated arguments.
Yea, that is the way of it isn't it, it seems that if I disagree with the
assumptions being made I'm making myself out to be something
less than the next guy. At least you don't (here) turn it into a personal
judgment call.
kelly
the notion that something might be either bent or straight but not both is appealing to the general public. but once you read a little einstein you will see it is all about the system of reference. if you want to debate someone successfully first know what he is claiming and his arguments.
Originally posted by twhiteheada line in space is straight if you cannot connect two random points in that line with a line different than said line.
For good reason. You are quick to avoid answering critical questions. That to me always indicates dishonesty. I can think of no other reason why you would do so.
In this case you simply wont tell me how someone could identify whether a line in space is straight. If you simply don't know then I would have far more respect for you than if you instead carefully avoid the question every time it is asked.
Originally posted by twhiteheadEvery question is critical, I ask them and get junk sometimes too, or
For good reason. You are quick to avoid answering critical questions. That to me always indicates dishonesty. I can think of no other reason why you would do so.
In this case you simply wont tell me how someone could identify whether a line in space is straight. If you simply don't know then I would have far more respect for you than if you instead carefully avoid the question every time it is asked.
no response at all. Typically I don't bash people for such things at the
drop of a hat, with two exceptions here, who basically only contribute
insults and petty belittlements as their whole contribution to any
discussion. I suggest if you cannot offer me a modicum of respect we
should part company with our disagreements since obviously you are
past being congenial now it seems.
Now least you accuse me of anything else if there is one responce
you are lookking for or a couple post them I'll respond, but that is
it.
Kelly
Originally posted by ZahlanziName one claim where you feel that is true.
it is not that you disagree with us, it is the way you disagree with us. if we make a claim in a subject you haven't done sufficient research in, then it is reasonable for us to expect to research that subject and then find flaws in our thinking. not use unrelated arguments.
the notion that something might be either bent or straight but not both is appea ...[text shortened]... e. if you want to debate someone successfully first know what he is claiming and his arguments.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayone claim that i feel is true but don't have sufficient knowledge in or an example where you made claims without sufficient knowledge?
Name one claim where you feel that is true.
Kelly
well for the first: i claim that the theory of probability is useless. but since i don't have sufficient knowledge in that area, i avoid getting into a discussions because i will lose and there might be issues that prove me wrong
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay…but when they bend they are not straight, the long and short of my point. READ
I don't care about putting lines in the 4th dimension, put them in,
and if you want to say doing so makes them bend, GREAT, but when
they bend they are not straight, the long and short of my point. READ
MY POSTS AGAIN, I have not changed positions.
Kelly
MY POSTS AGAIN, I have not changed positions.
.…
Yes, I have read your post again and, yes, you haven’t changed your “position” -Your position is to ignore whatever I say. To words of this effect, I pointed out that to say “but when they bend they are not straight” is not an argument that 4-dimensional curvature of space cannot exist thus this “point” of yours is irrelevant to the issue -but you just idiotically ignore this (perhaps in the hope nobody notices that you ignore this?).
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat is a terrible definition which basically rules out straight lines from existing. In 3 dimensional space it is always possible to find an infinite number of lines to connect two points.
a line in space is straight if you cannot connect two random points in that line with a line different than said line.
Originally posted by KellyJayI want to know whether or not you know of a theoretical method for finding out whether a line is straight.
Every question is critical, I ask them and get junk sometimes too, or
no response at all. Typically I don't bash people for such things at the
drop of a hat, with two exceptions here, who basically only contribute
insults and petty belittlements as their whole contribution to any
discussion. I suggest if you cannot offer me a modicum of respect we
shou ...[text shortened]... one responce
you are lookking for or a couple post them I'll respond, but that is
it.
Kelly
I do not need you to have the actual instruments to carry out the measurement, but simply state what the methodology would be.
I put it to you that there is no such method in existence and therefore your whole concept of a straight line is of no value as we can never identify such straight lines.
Originally posted by twhiteheadtry and elaborate. i can claim pink ducks existing but if i don't explain it isn't worth much.
That is a terrible definition which basically rules out straight lines from existing. In 3 dimensional space it is always possible to find an infinite number of lines to connect two points.
3D, not 4D. shortest path between two points. how many ways can you connect 2 points while staying in 3D?
Originally posted by twhiteheadso first you yell at me because i ruled out the existance of straight lines and then you say there is no method of identifying a straight line.
I want to know whether or not you know of a theoretical method for finding out whether a line is straight.
I do not need you to have the actual instruments to carry out the measurement, but simply state what the methodology would be.
I put it to you that there is no such method in existence and therefore your whole concept of a straight line is of no value as we can never identify such straight lines.
make up your mind.
Originally posted by ZahlanziWhere did you say "shortest path" in the post I was responding to?
try and elaborate. i can claim pink ducks existing but if i don't explain it isn't worth much.
3D, not 4D. shortest path between two points. how many ways can you connect 2 points while staying in 3D?
And since you have now changed the definition, what will you do if there is more than one possible 'shortest path'?
Originally posted by twhiteheadyes, i agree i should have mentioned shortest path.
Where did you say "shortest path" in the post I was responding to?
And since you have now changed the definition, what will you do if there is more than one possible 'shortest path'?
more than one possible shortest path? in 3d? without taking shortcuts through superior dimensions? elaborate
Originally posted by ZahlanziExcuse me, I said a claim I made, not one you make up.
one claim that i feel is true but don't have sufficient knowledge in or an example where you made claims without sufficient knowledge?
well for the first: i claim that the theory of probability is useless. but since i don't have sufficient knowledge in that area, i avoid getting into a discussions because i will lose and there might be issues that prove me wrong
Kelly
Originally posted by Andrew Hamiltonidiotically
[b]…but when they bend they are not straight, the long and short of my point. READ
MY POSTS AGAIN, I have not changed positions.
.…
Yes, I have read your post again and, yes, you haven’t changed your “position” -Your position is to ignore whatever I say. To words of this effect, I pointed out that to say “but when they bend they are not st ...[text shortened]... but you just idiotically ignore this (perhaps in the hope nobody notices that you ignore this?).[/b]
What is this?
I've been sticking to one point; it was that you and others here have
said in this universe you can have a straight line and it will come back
and connect to itself. Which I have denied, and you now are calling me
and idiot! The whole point of this discussion from my perspective you
have to bend the rules of language, you have to twist the realm of
common sense to make your beliefs about the universe seem rational,
and you cannot have a discussion of this type without lowering it to
this level. Why can’t you just stick to the discussion why must you
insist on this type of language?
Kelly