Leaderboard

Thank you for your posting, I fear it will not be long before the moderators remove your attachment as being against the rules here and against what they have already told you. I see from the attachment that you wish to discuss two and a half thousand year old mathematics. Do you not think we have moved on at least a little bit since then ? You have introduced some more modern terms manifold, group, order but tried to use them in non mathematical ways. The 5 platonic solids you mention form what we now call a 'homotopy group' and it is by this means that we can prove that there are only these 5 regular solids in 3 dimensions. They actually enjoy no particular order (in the mathematical sense). Groups are not, as you suggest, series in mathematics, they have a very special definition. Unfortunately the rest of your article starts to wander off into mystic woo, for instance trying to introduce the so called golden ratio, instead of finding out just how much more modern mathematics in general and geometry in particular has to offer. You may wish some entertaining light reading about geometry. Try perusing The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Geometry by David Wells. You may also like The Self Made Tapestry - Pattern formation in nature by Phillip Ball I think you will find many suprises in it especially as it has a similar theme to yours, but with the benefit of modern scientific observations so it represents the best of our knowledge. I suggest avoiding entering a slanging match about Einstein. Although he may well have been the world's greatest Physicist, he was no a Mathematician and had to rely on support form for competent mathematicians. Od course many other scientists have done great things in many other areas of science, both before, at the same time and after. One thing I picked up from your earlier postings was concsrned 'the continuum'; The theoretical nature of the continuum has, as you say, been a subject of investigation since before Greek times and has still not been settled today. But for all current practical purposes the continuum we live in behaves observably like the one you will find in any standard textbook of continuum mechanics. It is only the pure mathematicians that are still arguing over Cantor's 'Continuum Hypothesis' and the practical result will be the same whichever one is eventually proved correct, - if that ever happns.

I told you. First read the two papers for which I have provided references. This teaches you how to find known literature. Then, for the review, you go to the back and look at the references. These are papers that are described in the review. Take those references and search for them on pubmed. This is how you find additional literature. Then look at the older paper I referenced. Then go to pubmed (or google scholar if you prefer) and check out which newer papers have referenced that paper. This teaches you how to look for new papers which are based on previous work. Learning requires work and effort. It is not a passive process.

It doesn't much matter who. What matters is they will delay. That's the goal here. If you're losing a court case, the tactic is to slow things down until you can find something to stop your bleeding. If you're winning a court case, the tactic is to speed things up so you can close it out while you have the upper hand. Trump and team have used the delay with lawyers tactic with enormous success over the last 4 decades all the way back to his years screwing people over (not paying contracts and contractors, shady real estate deals, bad beef and airline projects, distractions through tabloids, etc.) since his time in New York.

So this 'problem' is based on A Einstein's quote, and his quest for a Unified Field Theory ? That, because geometry is used in building one model, GR, it should be used for all physical models ? And the fact that geometry lacks a basic 'consistency' ( for lack of a better word ) means that it cannot be used to build all other models ? Have I got it straight ? Geometry, and all of mathematics, are tools, used for physical model building. There is a vast difference between the physical 'reality' ( whatever that is ) and the model we use to describe it and make predictions. And 'tools' don't require 'consistency/coherence'; I certainly don't expect that from my hammer and saw. Incidentally, A Einstein's search for a Unified Field Theory, was, at best, misguided. Kaluza-Klein had some promise, but that was before anyone had any consideration for the 'strong ( color ) interaction, and the weak interaction.

As regards the K-Pg extinction event, the primary sieve for survival seems to be whether or not a bird posessed teeth. Toothed birds (Enantiornithines & Hesperornithines) which were dominant in the Cretaceous were all wiped out while just a few beaked taxa survived. But this is an interesting read: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/why-birds-survived-and-dinosaurs-went-extinct-after-asteroid-hit-earth-180975801 So having both a beak and a more developed brain seem to be linked.

Based on this silly protracted lead in, there is approximately zero chance the rest will be worth anyone's attention.

According to a report Scholz suggested a neutral status for Ukraine with guarantees from Russia and the US. Zelensky responded that Putin could not be trusted to uphold such an agreement and seemingly with good reason. Before that, in the meeting between Scholz and Putin, Putin again reiterated the one people claim of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. As such his motivation does not seem to be borne out of fear of the West, but rather a desire of the creation of an USSR style Russia in his image.

The only way to explain quantum physics is if particle micro cosmos is in its own time that is much faster. The particle micro cosmos time is much faster so it mean that speed of light is moving much faster. Just as the people on the planet Gargantua they will see the planets in the night sky spinn around the planet as if the planets seem to be as clouds around the solar system. They will see the universe end, if time is slow enough on the planet. So for them all these planets will be as a spheric shells around its sun. That is what we see in particle physics. We live in a much slower time compared to particle micro cosmos. So speed of light will be much much faster in micro cosmos, from our perspective. That is why we see particles as quantum fields. We can take a picture of the quantum world and we will see particles. But we do not see the "bullits" of the gun. We only see the effect of the "bullit". Particles live in a time that move much faster than ours. Einstein was right Everything is space/time. Regards from Sweden ---------------------------------------------------------

Sorry I misspelled it! Wikipedia USED to have a dedicated page on TERRAIN THEORY and then (post COVID) changed the article name to: Germ theory denialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_denialism Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Béchamp This is not a satisfactory reply. That is why I posted this query on this science forum. I keep running into dead ends at other places like PubMed. BOTTOM LINE: Human and animal LAB-BASED microbiological studies using common-illness-causing pathogens should be comprised rich, robust and heavily populated database. BOTTOM LINE 2: I wanna see Mus musculus sneezing (or not) .