The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!

[gravityblock]

Man did I have you pegged.It's always the same with you guys.  I asked you to define that in terms that are useful to me.  You have refused to do so and have refused to admit you don't understand. Why is that?

There is no better definition that is more useful to you, other than your own definition, and you have refused to provide this.

Gravock

[sarkeizen]

the rectilinear mathematical equations is evidence of a time element. 

If by "rectilinear mathematical equations" you mean his use of drawing "steps" and claiming (or at least appearing to) that this correctly measures the arc.   Then it's not evidence of anything if it doesn't do that and I think you know that it doesn't.

Are you saying that you don't see how this would come up with a different value for the pythagorean theorem?

[sarkeizen]

There is no better definition that is more useful to you, other than your own definition, and you have refused to provide this.

Are you high?  What we are talking about is YOUR concept.  How can you demand that I provide a definition for YOUR concept?

All I did was ask you to frame it in a manner grounded in Axiomatic Set Theory.  The point of using ZF(C) is so that mathematics has a common understanding of how things are proven.  One that is free of ambiguity.

So either you don't know how to do this and are too much of an enormous gaping asshole to admit it OR you are deliberately dragging your heels (or perhaps something else but the first one seems the most likely. ).

[MarkE]

This is not what I asked you.  I asked you, "If you disagree with his statement, then please show how the perimeter changes after each step."  You once again try to take a circular path with a time element and turn it into a circle with no time element.

Gravock

LOL, as has been pointed out to you as well as Miles Mathis, the method fails to correctly determine the length of even a single line segment that is not parallel to one of the ordinate axes.  The perimeter of the object doesn't change:  It is what it is.  And the hapless Mathis method of determining that perimeter starts with an inaccurate estimate and never improves.

[gravityblock]

If by "rectilinear mathematical equations" you mean his use of drawing "steps" and claiming (or at least appearing to) that this correctly measures the arc.   Then it's not evidence of anything if it doesn't do that and I think you know that it doesn't.

Are you saying that you don't see how this would come up with a different value for the pythagorean theorem?

Why are you trying to change the subject by bringing in Pythagorean theorem?  The  Pythagorean theorem does not hold in a non-Euclidean geometry.  Google it!

Gravock