I'm a scientist,that's mean that I OBSERVE nature and draw conclusions from what I see.And I see space.THAT'S THE OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE.
Now,we observe that space have some properties,but there is not an explanation of these properties and the 5 laws are designed for that-to provide explanation.
That's matter of SCIENCE,not of LANGUAGE.So,please use SCIENCE,not semantic or linguistic or whatever language stupidity you can think of.LANGUAGE IS IRRELEVANT TO PHYSICS.

• He or she must be kidding, Harv. - quiet - July 10, 2004 - 18:43 UTC
  • I know very well what I'm talking about - qazws - July 10, 2004 - 19:21 UTC
    • That went well.... - quiet - July 12, 2004 - 16:22 UTC
      • Why do you want to know me? - qazws - July 16, 2004 - 11:54 UTC
        • I think your answer speaks for itself - quiet - July 18, 2004 - 18:17 UTC
          • That's my position - qazws - July 19, 2004 - 09:55 UTC
            • My advice for Gfjhgvfgb - secretary - July 19, 2004 - 12:42 UTC
              • "But is seems" is a cliche oft used by demagogues. - quiet - August 3, 2004 - 00:28 UTC
• Some perspective - harvey1 - July 12, 2004 - 00:18 UTC
  • I'm very glad that you finally nderstnd me - qazws - July 12, 2004 - 09:11 UTC
    • but - harvey1 - July 12, 2004 - 14:23 UTC
      • It is not necessary - qazws - July 16, 2004 - 12:08 UTC
        • The trouble is... - harvey1 - July 16, 2004 - 14:49 UTC
          • I can do the trick - qazws - July 17, 2004 - 10:41 UTC
            • Still something missing - harvey1 - July 20, 2004 - 15:31 UTC
              • You've got me right - qazws - July 21, 2004 - 09:05 UTC
                • Not really - harvey1 - July 21, 2004 - 14:20 UTC
                  • A fundamental question-A fundamental answer - qazws - July 21, 2004 - 15:54 UTC
                    • Why you don't reply me??? - qazws - July 26, 2004 - 09:41 UTC