View Single Post
Re: Does Not Electricity Invariably Move At Right Angles Out of 4-D Matter?
Old
  (#6 (permalink))
RascalPuff
Aka the White Mongol
RascalPuff has a spectacular aura about
 
RascalPuff's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,449
Thanks Given: 89
Thanked 81x in 77 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rep Power: 21
   
Awards Showcase
2nd Place - Monthly Theme Quiz 
Total Awards: 1
Re: Does Not Electricity Invariably Move At Right Angles Out of 4-D Matter? - 05-07-2007, 05:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJA View Post
Ok, I'll try your new definition for electricity as "the fifth dimension" in this sentence:

A man was found guilty and sentenced to death by way of a fifth dimension chair.

Sorry, but I don't think it works at all.

As far as your logic regarding the science of physics, complexity only takes you further from the simple truth. Definitions as well as measure are only probable at best. Beyond probable is absolute truth. Einstein was so close.

MJA
_____________________________

Dear MJA: I'll try a parallel for your new definition of the instrumentation of capital punishment imposed upon: a man who was found guilty and sentenced to death by way of an E=MC2 chair. I don't think that works any better than what you're sorry for.

As far as your logic regarding the science of physics, aversion from detailed method leading to the simple truth - and what may be the most concise summarisation of a Theory of Everything - is: 'Everything is energy'. It abandons a lot of comprehensive details and maroons understanding to the confines of three words. An even more abbreviated Theory of Everything is how close Einstein was with E=MC2 There is no apparent heuristic evidence of algorithm in your quasi hyperbolic parody. It does not sit well with the panel on brevity and keeping it reasonably simple.
The entire internet might shut down along with all manner of communication if everyone definably and measurably adhered to the stringent Eastern maxim that a wise man says nothing. In which case you may be close to and approach the sagacity of a wise man. I don't find your response any kind of functional contribution. Please excuse the fact that my response is slightly more extensive - and less energetically efficient and presciently meaningful - than yours.
  
Reply With Quote