The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!

[gravityblock]

LOL.  Your statements are all ... wait for it ... assertions!

The two "wait for it" statements were not assertions, and were backed up with mathematical rebuttals.

Gravock

[gravityblock]

LOL.  "Pee Wee's Playhouse" went off the air but you give us this.

Another psychological projection.  It's obvious you try to bury your posts behind a bunch of spam when the debate isn't going in your favour.

Gravock

[MarkE]

The two "wait for it" statements were not assertions, and were backed up with mathematical rebuttals.

Gravock

LOL.   Somewhere your "mathematical rebuttals" were devoid of any math, or any actual data that supported your assertions.  We all know that you are playing a game for LULZ.  Do you think you are doing well?

[MarkE]

Another psychological projection.  It's obvious you try to bury your posts behind a bunch of spam when the debate isn't going in your favour.

Gravock

Debate?  Where is the debate?  You deny the Pythagorean Theorem.

[sarkeizen]

Is this a correct way to find the length of the arc?

Just pointing out that you have avoided answering my question but of course you will demand that I answer yours, then perhaps lie a little or pretend that you have.  Is there a reason that the deliberately ignorant all act this way?

Do you disagree with Mathis's statement of, "we can draw eight steps or 64 steps or an infinity of steps, and it will not change a thing?"

Yes.  In the specific sense that it is meaningful to the problem at hand - which is measuring the arc.  You could apply the identical principle to the hypotenuse and end up with a contradiction to the pythagorean theorem.  However since we know the pythagorean theorem to be true by other means we know that this can not be a correct measure.  QED.

Next?

Your method for finding the length of the arc is not applicable for a circular path with a time variable.

At what point did I mention "my method".  I'm just saying that Mathis could have his head cut off and do math nearly as well as he currently does.

Al-right, then once again let me get your thesis in words before we begin, as I previously did with the car race.

Actually you didn't.  You didn't explain either question well and you didn't answer my questions.   Go ahead and look.  Nope.  At no point did you find out what I think about the actual problem you were positing.  Do you usually delude yourself like this? 

Do you think pi is a dimensionless constant?

Define "dimensionless constant" using only the lemmas of ZF(C).