| And then the mathematicians invented fractions of a dimension |
| Adapted for the Internet from: Why God Doesn't Exist |
Relativistic dimensions have so many properties that they confuse the experts beyond hope. Theorists not
only talk about curved and rolled-up dimensions and dimensions that grow. They have also proposed that
you can have a fraction of a dimension.
So let's explain. By 'curled up', the relativist means that a particle returns to its starting point after having
traveled a short distance. Hence, curled-up is a synonym of size, and the argument shows that the
mathematicians are not talking about dimensions. They are talking about motion, at best about vectors.
Relativists are describing circular motion which, if quantified, becomes a curved number line. There is no
contradiction because number lines don't have direction. A curve lacks one of the attributes of qualitative
dimensions: pointing or facing. In Physics, we can perhaps declare that we accidentally dented the edge of a
box, but never that we deliberately curled up its width!
Likewise, when the numskulls of Math invoke the concept of fractal or fractional dimension, they are not
referring to dimensions at all. A fractal (or capacity) dimension alludes to the exponent, the power to which we
elevate a number. Since the idiots of Math call everything a dimension, they use this 'exponent' notion as a
synonym of length, width, and height when it suits their argument. They are forcefully extrapolating Math into
Physics.
An exponent is simply the number of times we multiply a number by itself. In the expression n(Є) = Є-D, the
exponent D can be a non-integer such as 2.5. Relativists call this variable a dimension. Thus, they arrive at the
misleading term fractional dimension or fractal. Clearly, this has nothing to do with the qualitative dimensions
of Physics. Thus, they end up with amusing conclusions. One example is the Menger Sponge. It allegedly has
a 'topological' dimension of 2.73, meaning that the idiot of Mathematics insinuates and wants you to believe
that he is talking about geometry or with something to do with shape.
- "topological dimension: In mathematics, the Lebesgue covering dimension or
topological dimension of a topological space is defined to be the minimum
value of n, such that every open cover has a refinement in which no point is
included in more than n+1 elements. If no such minimal n exists, the space is
said to be infinite dimensional. [1]
Now what could the word dimension possibly mean in this context? Can you perchance have 1.0 length, 1.0
width, and 0.73 height? Obviously the idiots of topology are using the term dimension to confuse themselves
thinking that they can stealthily and at their convenience sneak the notion that their dissertation is about
geometric figures.
- " A line is one-dimensional because it has length... A plane is two-dimensional,
since it has length and width... A box is three-dimensional: it has length, width
and depth... If we divide a one-dimensional object in two smaller equal parts,
we get two small versions of the same object... If we divide a 2 dimensional
object in half its length and width, we get four copies of the same object... If we
divide a 3 dimensional object in half its length, width and depth, we get eight
copies of the same object... Now, let us do likewise with a fractal object as the
Sierpinski triangle. If we divide it in half its height and base, we only get three
copies (remember that the central portion do not belong to the triangle). Then,
we need an exponent z such that 2^z = 3... The Sierpinski triangle is not one-
dimensional because 3 is greater than 2, but it isn't two-dimensional because
3 is less than 4. So, its dimension must lie between those two dimensions
(1 and 2)." [2]
What significance can such idiocy have in the real physical world? Is this what the idiots of Mathematics do to
earn their living? Is this what they waste their time and your tax dollars on?
Let's make it as clear as a crystal. In Topology, dimensions are powers, the exponent to which a number is
elevated, the number of times or partial times it must be multiplied by itself. The Mathematicians end up with
these ridiculous notions because they use the word dimension inconsistently within the same presentation.
They talk about powers and insinuate that they're talking about length, width, and height. What should we call
the 0.73 dimension? Height? Perhaps in the religion of Topology the Menger Sponge has 2.73 dimensions.
For the purposes of Physics and Geometry, this cubic Swiss cheese is nothing but 3-D!
You don't believe me? Manufacture it and I'll show you that it doesn't have 2.73 dimensions you stupid
mathematical morons!
| I whupped ya because my staff is one-dimensional. Your scrawny stick is barely a fractal. From now on I'll call you Little Bill. |
| I hope the water's warm. |
| Little Bill falling a fractal of the way |
- Module home page: The mathematical definition of dimension is unscientific
- Pages in this module:
- 7. This page: And then the mathematicians invented fractions of a dimension
- ________________________________________________________________________________________
- Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008