George Hammond wrote:
> TZ wrote:
> > I have 1 question..........
> > whats this got to do with physics, and maths and physics relativity?
> I'm not the one who started crossposting this thread to the
> math and physics NG's, but since I started the thread on
> [alt.sci.proof-of-god] I'll be glad to answer your question.
> The average idiot (PhD) assumes that the reason animals
> have a minimum of 4-LEGS (notice there are no 3-legged
> animals) is because of "Darwinian Natural Selection".
> This of course is SHEER PEDANTIC PHD IDIOCY. As Hammond
> has pointed out time and again, the reason for it is:
> The Euclidean Metrical property of Real Space
> It is an EXPERIMENTAL FACT that the Metric of Real Space
> is EUCLIDEAN:
> ds^2 = dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2
> As Weyl, Einstein, Riemann and others discovered a long time ago,
> the EUCLIDEAN METRIC (pure quadratic metric) is the ONLY metrical
> form that will allow the rotation of a solid object in space without
> it blowing up (fragmenting) due to spatial distortion. If you had
> any metric other than the EUCLIDEAN (also called Pythagorean,
> Cartesian and Riemannian) you would not be able to physically rotate
> a solid object in real space... certainly a major inconvenience.
This is wrong. Any space of constant curvature is homogeneous and
isotropic. I.e., a positively or negatively curved space has the same
group of motions (translations & rotations) as does a flat space (zero
curvature) of the same dimensionality. (See, e.g., Eisenhart, Riemannian
Geometry, section 27.) It is easy to demonstrate this on a 2-sphere.
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 17 2001 - 10:08:53 EDT