Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
He Has Used Assumptions

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on July 8, 2001 20:05:30 UTC

I thought I made this very clear in my prior post. He has used assumptions of spacific symmetries from which his derivation is correct.

But his results do not apply to any set of numbers. Only to sets that agree with his assumptions.

He has not made a mathematical error. His error is to claim that it applies to any set of numbers. Suppose we choose for our set the number one. That qualifies as any set of numbers. Can you show me how his fundamental equation follows from that set?

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins