The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!

[gravityblock]

It's funny how any person with working synapses, and who is not just trolling for responses could reach such a conclusion after I have explained that the experiment could have just as easily leveled the blue track and the blue car would never reach its destination.  Readers can decide for themselves why it is that you have offered such a conclusion.LOL, here we go again with you trying to introduce movement into static geometry.That was quite a load.  Are your pants full yet?

TK's example was based on movement and not static geometry, but he conveniently left out the time variable which is found in the real world, just as plane geometry conveniently leaves time out of the equation.  My reply to his example did not use static geometry.  Please show me otherwise!  Also, there are many high road low road videos showing the same result.  Also, I clearly stated that both cars had the same net fall in my original post, so you can not say you thought one track was level and the blue car would never reach its destination.  It is your pants that is full, and this is another psychological projection by you.

Gravock

[sarkeizen]

Obviously you, sarkeizen, and MarkE would jump into the green car and take the straight and shortest path, while I jump into the yellow car taking the curved and longest path and win the race!

LOL. Why am I in any car? I asserted exactly one thing.  That Mathis wrote something which, if correct disproves the pythagorean theorem.  You jumped up and down and hollered and whined like an infant about how I was wrong (without asking a single question!).   I've provided a clear, jargon-free proof of my point.  If there's a problem with my logic, then please point out the precise lemma (that's a math term you know!) where I made my error.  Blanket statements like "But it's just not Timey enough" are arguments by assertion by-the-by.

Mathis got tripped up by an apparent paradox that every O-Level calculus student gets to see.   Please stop making yourself more stupid...or you know what...don't keep being stupid.  I'm rather confident you're of little value to society as you are.   I tend to think that crackpots like Philip, Profitis and gravityblock are, in part expressing some self-esteem issues.

[MarkE]

TK's example was based on movement and not static geometry, but he conveniently left out the time variable which is found in the real world, just as plane geometry conveniently leaves time out of the equation.  My reply to his example did not use static geometry.  Please show me otherwise!  Also, there are many high road low road videos showing the same result.  Also, I clearly stated that both cars had the same net fall in my original post, so you can not say you thought one track was level and the blue car would never reach its destination.  It is your pants that is full, and this is another psychological projection by you.

Gravock

Yes, your pants are very full.

[gravityblock]

I tend to think that crackpots like Philip, Profitis and gravityblock are, in part expressing some self-esteem issues.

It is you who has self-esteem issues and not able to handle the truth.  Your post below is evidence of this.

This is not a mathematical or scientific rebuttal, and is an argument by assertion with nothing to back up your false claims.

Gravock

Shut.  The FUCK. Up.

[sarkeizen]

It is you who has self-esteem issues and not able to handle the truth.  Your post below is evidence of this.

Because I told someone who wrongly called something an argument by assertion to shut the fuck up?   Didn't you deserve that?   Really seems like it.  In fact I personally believe that you have a serious deficiency in "shut the fuck up" and decided to supplement your clearly lacking diet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNQaHWbQ-c&index=2&list=PLtzd7Tqr6lkJwu8ZrMUL1-q8LE_pVgPlY&t=1m31s

Anyway again, I provided a proof, clear with no jargon.  You just have to show me which lemma is incorrect....or are you going to use my foul language as an excuse to avoid the fact that Mathis is wrong about something?

Really seems like it.