| Re: Inertial mass doesn't just exist in spacetime, it is spacetime. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: HuangHuang Date: Mar 15, 2008 16:49
On Mar 15, 5:50Â pm, "Androcles" wrote:
> "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" cox.net> wrote in messagenews:PjYCj.69234$497.65705@newsfe14.phx...
> | Dear Huang:
> || "Huang" yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> |news:6b5d5aa9-1cfa-4460-ac4d-f28cb9cbccec@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> | ...
> | > But they were conjured with a magic wand. And so too
> | > is randomness it seems, conjured with a magic wand.
> | > That is precisely what bugs me - quite a bit in fact.
> |
> | Sine and cosine are exponentials "fed" imaginary numbers.
>
> David A. Smith is "eats" horse shit (and that's not English either).
> Babbling clown.
Yep, e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0
been there, done that, DeMoivres formula, Euler equation, etc
I would never say that imaginary numbers dont make sense, or that
their validity is in question. But surely you will agree that it is
something of a philosophical leap of faith to say that negative
numbers have roots.
Afterall - we start by counting things with our fingers, which leads
us to naturals, and then to integers. But complex numbers ? Seems like
there is some abstraction going on here which resembles the conjuring
of randomness in many ways. From a philosophical standpoint.
| 
