Infinity.

[sadovnik socratus]

Infinity.
Infinity is the cause of the crisis in Physics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity
Question:
Can Infinity have concrete physical parameters?

============ .

[jer0en]

hardly, it's a metaphysical concept

it's a typical example of something that could never be proven physically,

because it's purely metaphysical

and as you know, nothing can be proven metaphysically

if it is true, it can only be tautologously true

you either accept or discard it as a fact

it's basicly like God, you can only believe in it

but then again, that would eventually go for your own existence

physics is just a frame in which things can be tentatively proven

for practicle reasons, specifically claiming the proof to be attainable,

while forfeiting on actual metaphysical proof which is unattainable

people that attempt to attach physical parameters to a metaphysical concept

are usually attempting to prove the unprovable as provable

in plain language proving the false to be true

99.9\% of all dogma is eventually legitimized by physical proof

the other 0.0\% is based on it

[jer0en]

proof

is what is killing our planet

currently there's more proof on earth than water

[jer0en]

you'll remember me when they prove you guilty in a court of law

of the following list of issues:

[jer0en]

proof

is what the police utilize to "maintain" their current reign of terror

by claiming to be able to prove absolutely anything of anyone they want

and all of that starts by claiming to be able to prove things physically

by claiming to be able to prove things period

[jer0en]

so the battle for control of planet earth

is fought on usenet more than in its streets

if you want control of its people

you will want control of sci.physics first

[jer0en]

if you can make all that stick

you can probably make all the rest stick as well

using it as an argument

it has been like that ever since formal reality stated

that the world was an giant egg

floating in a bowl of water

amidst four giant lotusses

that it would never get into contact with

formal reality has always told you

that your mother was a vile whore

when she was still alive

[jer0en]

so can infinity have physical parameters?

yes, but only in formal reality

only if you idolize it in some sort of scientific fetishism

not in any free practice of science

[jer0en]

now the question whether or not there would be forces on our planet

that seem to be quite deliberately messing with the quality of our sciences

raises the second question

of how much proof would you actually need to be satisfied

which however seems absolutely trivial compared to the third question

that more or less naturally follows from the first

where the hell are they coming from?

[jer0en]

the infinity particle is sheer Wittgenstein by the way

a verbal object in a verbal universe

which is typical for Wittgenstein's model

since space is a verbal object

his universe seems to be all-object-and-no-space

it seems we are given a treat here of rather common

(science) philosophical fallacies and misunderstandings

[jer0en]

if we have a look at Einstein's relativity theory, things aren't really any
better

I cite one of his booklets in which he instructs juveniles on the principles
of relativity:

"if the football is moving away from us at half the speed of light

then the light coming from people on it that allows us to see them

will take longer and longer to reach us as the football is moving further
and further away

and therefore we will see the people moving at half the speed that they
actually are

and this is why our time is going twice as fast as theirs"

well if anything that is the most sophisticated fallacy of the 20th century

in psychology this is known as a rather common mistake called projection

in metaphysics it is called a subject-object identification

what Einstein describes here would be the case if both times would be
perfectly synchronous

that we see things moving in slow-motion doesn't mean that thing are moving
in slow-motion

if our time would additionally have twice the speed of theirs

the people on the football would appear to move not twice, but four times as
slow

I cannot but conclude that relativity theory is a hoax

it is probably the mother of all hoaxes in today's physics

it is fake science

it isn't just scientifically negligent, it is perfectly deliberate and
methodical

in order to sabotage the further development of a just emerging science

by taking control of the scientific institution of physics

using tricks to play the mind that any medieval market place magician would
probably embrace

[jer0en]

and at the very least millions and millions of people have participated

in professing to a theory that does not compute

and is therefore intrinsically unintelligable

so that claiming to understand it could only be interpreted as a blatant lie

using their authority as someone with a scientific degree to make it stick

it is the modus operandi of judges that use their authorities

not to take notice of the defendant's case

simply by claiming that they did

even giving you their word for it

which judicially suffices because of their ultimate authorities

subsequently hanging you from the neck

so when people come asking questions

there will be no legal proof of them actually having read your case

and they will always have the excuse ready

that in the very very end and at the time

they had marital trouble which in that particular case

and that particular case only

prevented them from actually taking notice of the defendant's case

who didn't appear to be very credible anyway

allowing this awful miscarriage of justice to take place

amen

[jer0en]

because "they didn't know"

die haben das nicht gewußt

millions and millions of people professing to an inexistant physical model

and basing an entire century of fake science on top of it

and when people come asking questions

they can allways claim that

just like everybody else

they had been misled

by the intricacy of the scheme

and if necessary a small group will even reveal themselves as religious
fanatics

and be prosecuted to that effect

which no one ever died from before

and once again, if necessary only

and that ladies and gentlemen

is what we understand by the principle of "plausible deniability"

so I ask again

where are these people coming from?

what are their motives?

how in fact are they organized?

that is besides professionally in the physical science

are they from earth?

[jer0en]

after the execution

can I have anders breiviks brain?

[jer0en]

so, resuming

how do we get the false to be true

and make it a part of the great whole

of formal reality

1. we use the means of sophistication to create a pseudo-truth that is
sufficiently hard to debunk

2. we use the authority that comes with the offices we have acquired to
decree it as true

3. we make sure of plausible deniability just in case at a later stage
questions are asked

4. so we can make it a practice and repeat the process as many times as we
want

[jer0en]

the first is taken care of by the police when they accuse you

the second is taken care of by the district attorney when they indite you

the third is taken care of by the judge when he doesn't read your defense

and the fourth is taken care of by the police if

for some inexplicable reason

after the trial you are still alive

[jer0en]

you see

perfectly analogous with the practice of physics

[jer0en]

present society isn't running on milk and alcohol

but on relativity and democracy

in that order

these are the two pillars that our current creed

i.e. our current formal reality is based on

so if relativity is formally rejected

then it is only a matter of time

until the leg of formal democracy

and its police state

will be starting to crumble

that is how important physics is

to a system of cognitive repression

[sadovnik socratus]

Infinity is Aether, Vacuum, Nothingness, Emptiness
The law number one:
Physics cannot live without Emptiness
The law number two:
The Emptiness isn’t emptiness
The law number three:
The fool won’t understand,
The ignorant won’t recognize
=.

[TheInquirer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfinite_number

--
I ask, becos I'm curious.

[xeno morph]

Only if there are infinite physical parameters of some actual thing.

[scampbe...@yahoo.com]

Then again, that's just to say that infinity has a lot in common with nothing at all

[scampbe...@yahoo.com]

On Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:34:11 PM UTC+1, sadovnik socratus wrote:

The problem with 'infinity' as I see it is that mathematicians are prone to think/imagine it as indefinite extension of the finite. As such, it makes sense to think of infinity as more complex than the finite. However, for the scholastic thinker Duns Scotus the infinite is actually supremely SIMPLE because it is not composite (made up of finite parts). It is without limits, boundaries, parameters in the sense that a perfect circle is without any 'points'.