Verbindung hergestellt.connected.
num: 29435
------------------------- GRUPPE: sci.physics.relativity,sci.math,de.sci.mathematik FROM : Ross FinlaysonDATE : 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: