Verbindung hergestellt.connected.
num: 29435
-------------------------
GRUPPE: sci.physics.relativity,sci.math,de.sci.mathematik
FROM : Ross Finlayson
DATE : Tue, 27 Jan 2026 22:44:45 -0800
TEMA : Re: Gravitational acceleration
---------------------------------------------
On 01/26/2026 09:30 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 01/26/2026 08:46 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 26/01/2026 à 22:46, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :
>>> Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>> About rest/rest motion/motion and equal/opposite, sort
>>>> of Galileo's "three laws" that Newton makes "one law"
>>>> then that Einstein sort of scratches away "rest/rest"
>>>> and calls that "a theory of relative motion", [...]
>>>
>>> Pure fantasy.
>>>
>>> 1. Galilei postulated the principle of relativity ("Galileo's ship"),
>>> not any "three laws".
>>>
>>> 2. Newton formulated three laws of motion and one of gravitation
>>> (among other theories, some of which have been falsified, too).
>>>
>>> 3. Observations showed successively that these principles and laws are
>>> not quite correct (constancy of the speed of light in vacuum: Rømer/
>>> Huygens, Fizeau, Michelson/Morley; deviation of orbits from
>>> predictions:
>>> Le Verrier [Mercury]; deflection of light), and Einstein explained,
>>> with special and then general relativity, why.
>>
>> Finlayson is a kind of random bullshit generator not a real human being.
>
> Au contraire, I have a belly button.
>
> "Forget Irrelevant Nominalist Laws About Your Sets Of Numbers".
>
> I have a belly button, and a very long library card.
>
> It reminds me of this one cartoon in the newspaper
> syndicated here, "Frank & Ernest". It's a panel strip.
>
> One of my favorites is "Wanted: Tamer Lion".
>
> https://www.frankandernest.com/search/index.php?keywords=Lion&pm=&pd=&py=2000&kw=just+between+you+and+me&opt=x&submit=Search
>
>
> https://www.redmeat.com/comic/3370400 a bit more sedate
>
> "Fide et Fortitudine", they used to say.
>
> Comme Valle en Francais.
>
> https://www.armsandbadges.com/itemindex.aspx?letter=V%
>
> I'm just a regular person with a varied background
> like anybody else.
>
>
> It is a sort of, at least, a _pseudo_ random generation, though.
> The term "bullcrap" as it were, I think it derives from that
> when two bulls standoff and contest, if you've observed this before,
> the loser evacuates its bowels, after all the hullaballoo, as it were.
>
>
>
Well, that's bravado, though it's not false.
Whether or not grand-grand-pere had neat
fingernails and lacy, starched shirtsleeves
and a fashionable hat, is not relevant to
matters of intellectual opinion about these
matters of theory. If great-grandmother was
running a steam mangler pressing sheets all day,
or great-great-grandfather was a manservant
and chauffeur in the house of Mr. Case, though
he grew up in the house and was adopted and
it's not exactly clear exactly the relation, it's
just not relevant, to our issues here these days.
If great-great-grandfather was a teamster,
and thus spent days driving a team of horses,
(a teamster not a longshoreman), well at least
his father had his walking papers, and made
something of himself, not just because Lincoln
was his cousin. Jimmy was a log truck driver.
(Also he was familiar with the Pershing and
knew something about pony nukes.)
Great-great-grandma Ziech was the most recent
of my ancestors to emigrate to America,
about 1916 I suppose.
So, I have a new idea, or at least new to me.
If you follow my opinion or what I actually say,
then one of the ideas is that to complement
the usual account of the phenomenological
as for matters of sense, is an account of the
noumenological, often referred to as faculties
or the transcendental, that here it's also as
related to matters of sense, or sens. Besides
the usual account of phenomenological senses
like taste, touch, sight, hearing, smell, those
not necessarily all-inclusive yet considered
comprehensive, are for "noumenological senses".
This is necessary to reconcile accounts like Kant's
and the Epicureans' about the only inter-subjective
things being matters of sense.
Then, these idea of the noumenological senses,
are for an object-sense, a word-sense, a number-sense,
a time-sense, and a sense of the continuum.
So, my new idea is that in the noumenological
senses, is a sense of the infinity, and also to
be added to the phenomenological senses,
a sense of nothing or an empty sense, so that
thusly there's an account of the extra-ordinary
that's only mental, while, the physical senses
always have something to compare and contrast,
nothing.
Then, the second part of the new idea is to
relate that to the absolute from the noumenological
and the relative from the phenomenological.
In the noumenological account sense is absolute:
in the phenomenological account sense is relative.
This is a sort of, "super-Archimedean account of sense".
Thusly, the inter-subjective makes a whole
sort of holism again about the inter-objective.
So, I thought that was nice.
Here's a video essay "Moment and Motion:
infinity and large numbers", it gives a very
good account of mathematical infinity and
relays a nice account of my discovery of a
"Factorial/Exponential Identity" and an
approximation of factorial in mathematics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5i7CuP80Sg&list=PLb7rLSBiE7F4eHy5vT61UYFR7_BIhwcOY&index=17
Obviously it doesn't make much sense to
adopt somebody's opinion on foundations
of mathematics if they haven't discovered
something actually new to the field. Since,
otherwise, we already have one.
head: