Yes , everybody has 3 dimensions, but if you expand away from any universal dot that dot will turn into a 0 point and visually have no dimensions.
I always 'see' because I can see. I consider gravity has a cause and affect, I 'see' the cause is N by the physics involved. added - (q1+q2)=N=F^2
Zt(7d) =11d7= Zity70 elevndyseven under left handed spin factors defined by selenium activation by elementary transposition of transverse particle interaction as defined by Ahos theory. My F theory negates N theory according to quantum distress enacted by Boson vibrations.
LOl you know I do not know what that means so cannot produce a counter argument about those specifics. However try this, the Earths electromagnetic field and the Suns electromagnetic field have mass and are relatively solid to each other......they are likewise in polarity and what does likewise do? Newtons 3rd law. i.e Einsteins fabric of space. Which is actually the ''fabric'' of fields. added- To explain Q.F.S (quantum field solidity) try to push two likewise polarity magnets together , the force between the magnets create an invisible wall.
You can't see the doorway to the other dimension, can you? It's counterintuitive to the interest of the casual passer-by who might be interested in such things to negate mathematics from physics. Respectfully speaking. Perhaps study Schläfli's works. It'll be good for you to learn to see the door between cause and effect.
It would seem your understanding of reality is entirely based on what YOU see, bypassing the realities science sees behind you. This limitation renders your thought process painfully hampered and blindes you to what actually IS, Unless you somehow manage to open your eyes I must rescind my offer as your "Paper" will be incomprehensible to anyone outside your mind. Good Luck.
Quite clearly you have read that ambiguously. I 'see' past what science can 'see' , 'seeing' does not use my eyes, seeing uses my eyes.
Huh? it is not meaningless. It is to do with perspective and vision. An object receding away from you visually contracts, people do not understand that visual contraction of objects has a boundary where the object will vanish out of the line of sight and not be seen anymore. So when you look into space past the distant stars at the blackness ''background'' of space, there is lots of things in that space but they are beyond your sight boundary and relative to your vision they have 0 dimensions and do not exist. We can use a telescope to surpass the boundary and see these things that with the eye you cannot see.
Which means they are NOT 0 point dimensionally outside your perception, which is extremely limited and is not the reality. Space as well exists far beyond your perception, which it seems you mistake for the extent of reality and the Universe. You cannot see me holding my laptop right now, but I assure you I AM....I will now prove it by pressing "Post Reply" on my screen and you will then visually confirm I just typed this. This is how we explain things experimentally....making stuff up with no backing data does not work.
Surely you understand what the original object looked like. The fact you've receded so far away it looks like a point does not change the structure. This is predicated on a variant of the concept of out of sight out of mind.
Your answers smack of at best delusions and at worst a mentality or approach characterized by inconsistent or contradictory elements often seen in schizophrenia. I'm not saying you're schizophrenic but in the general sense of the definition your answers trend that direction.
I find it quite funny that when the ''trolls'' arrive in one of my threads, they always try to focus towards me rather than tackling the problem at hand. Let me put it simply for you all, you fail to address the problem because you know I am right and your jobs are at risk as scientists getting paid for garbage research. You cannot have a time dilation without the imaginary length to contract. It is made up subjective dogma that belongs in the bin, period.
Surely I have explained this several times already, and not once do I say the object physically changes in anyway, visual is not physical .
Of course they are not 0 point in dimensions outside my perception, I never said they were. I said visually. Do none of you understand what visual means?
I challenge anybody to challenge this definition: Time is an arbitrary quantifiable measurement indirectly proportional to ageing. I challenge anybody to challenge this statement: There is no space/distance/length between now time and your next now time. p.s now immediately follows now, you can try for yourselves counting time. Count slow or fast, does your counting alter time any? of course not and neither does counting the caesium frequency fast or slow. twin 1 is stationary and counting time at 1 count per second twin 2 is in motion and counting time at 2 counts per second Are their different rates of counting affecting anything? of course not. added-sarcasm 123456789 1.2.3.5.6.7.8.9 Wow science! a length contraction of time lmao.....
Every single one of us completely understand what visual means, otherwise we could not participate on this forum because we could not see it. I am unsure what YOU think visual is but, it is clearly not what the rest of humanity does. Perhaps you might try to explain your version of visual perception that I can gain understanding?
You complain about an ad hominem attack by mounting one. I'm not invested in you in a personal way. Your posts reveal us insight and doubt anyone goes further than this. I'm retired so I have no risk in losing a job. My skill set as a scientist was never at risk nor was I paid for ideology. Very little of my science deviated from my peers because that was my choice as well as my training. You are projecting your ideology and frankly paranoid delusions onto me. Since you have no ISP powers I include this as part of my judgment about you which I understand may be incorrect. Your conflicting thoughts and ideations about physics are just bizarre. Your ignorance of physics is remarkable if not profound. I'm not going to go further as this just isn't a fair debate and frankly I feel like a bully now. I hope your paper goes well.
