Algorithm Optimisation Championship. - page 28
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
A theory does not have to have proof. It only has to be consistent with observations. Strictly speaking, no theory can be proven. Study the scientific method. With your level of knowledge there is no point in even discussing anything.
I hope I am not offending anyone by trying to break down the theory of multiple dimensions in a spatial sense. Whether I will succeed or not, judge for yourself.
And so - let's untangle an obvious confusion between concepts:
Every object summarises many properties of its own. The more complex an object, the more properties it has.The properties of an object can be physical and non-physical.
All physical properties of objects have their own scale of measurement.
Space is the sum of the three properties of a physical object: Length, Height, Width.
Colour of an object is the sum of the three components of electromagnetic radiation of the optical range.
Density of the body of an object is a physical characteristic.
Time - a scale for measuring processes.
And so on...
We understand that these are simply properties of one object in front of us.
We should not confuse measurements of space (sum of the three properties), with measurements of other properties of objects, many of which are in the zone of subjective perception.
The worst thing is to criticise something, just from not understanding it. It's a guarantee that you'll never understand it.
On a spatial graph, you can put non-spatial properties, such as RGB colour components, and see the colour itself at a point in space.
The worst thing is to criticise something, just from not understanding it. This is a guarantee that you will never understand it.
On a spatial graph, you can put non-spatial properties, such as RGB colour components, and see the colour itself at a point in space.
I agree. I've already realised that 500 dimensions of space is a mathematical abstraction, and that's what you have to work with.
I have no further questions.
OK, but Einstein started with a theory, right? Is my level enough to understand it?
There are a lot of morons. Naturally they have doubts.
Tsiolkovsky was an opponent of the theory of relativity. He was closer to the creators of spacecraft. And what can be created by taking space and time as relative quantities?
There are a lot of opponents of TO. They even hold regular conferences.
Any theory begins with a postulate, statement or axiom. If we are talking about the theory of relativity, it is a postulate about the invariance of physical laws, and the speed of light in particular, with respect to the choice of an inertial reference system.
OK, but Einstein started with a theory, right? Is my level enough to understand that?
And "it" is what? It's Einstein's theory of relativity. If it's "yes", then it's not sure it's enough.
Firstly, I mean the fact that he started his work by developing theory, and then confirmed it in practice (allegedly).
And about whether or not I understand TO, you can be at peace - at my level I understand.
Tsiolkovsky was an opponent of the theory of relativity. He was closer to the creators of spacecraft. And what can be created by taking space and time as relative quantities?
There are many opponents of TR. They even hold regular conferences.
Tsiolkovsky was an opponent of the theory of relativity. He was closer to the creators of spacecraft. And what can be created by taking space and time as relative quantities?
There are many opponents of TR. They even hold regular conferences.