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
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Look At Your Assumptions

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on July 19, 2001 12:20:18 UTC

But you claim to not have made any. But in a recent post you admitted that some things, you did not call them assumptions, were required.

I think you have done a great thing. But you have made assumptions. And until you admit that we are at am impass. It's the same impass that others who know math have discussed with you.

I think the great thing you have done is to show how much physical law comes from simple symmetries. But the symmetries are assumptions, not requirements. Mathematics without postulates is uncomputable. And your work is definitely computable.

As far as I can tell everyone who understands math and has read your work agrees with what I just said. Your concern that this may influence those on this forum who do not understand math suggests to me that you are more interested in admiration than truth.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 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