Can religion reject this science ?

[james blunt]

No idea what good you think it will do to just repeat the same stuff that has already been addressed.

No it hasn't , you have addressed nothing , avoidance of the postulates.

Except all the ones already given to you.

You have give no evidence or proof .

Space does have physicality.

Really ? Then how is it possible that the exterior space of a deflated balloon ends up interior space of an inflated balloon ?

If space had any sort of physicality , the space would not be passive !


Dimensionality, geometry, and topology are not physical properties , they are geometrical properties . I suggest you improve your knowledge !

 

[ratiocinator]

Dimensionality, geometry, and topology are not physical properties , they are geometrical properties .

Ones that are realised in physical space. For example, there is no logical reason why space has to be three dimensional. We live in a space that has the physical property of being three dimensional.

 

[james blunt]

Ones that are realised in physical space. For example, there is no logical reason why space has to be three dimensional. We live in a space that has the physical property of being three dimensional.

3 dimensional is a limited visual in a n-dimensional space ! Matter is physics , dimensions are metric measurement , arbitrary relative !

 

[ChristineM]

.


Really ? Then how is it possible that the exterior space of a deflated balloon ends up interior space of an inflated balloon ?

If space had any sort of physicality , the space would not be passive !


Dimensionality, geometry, and topology are not physical properties , they are geometrical properties . I suggest you improve your knowledge !

Been here before and you appear to ignore inconvenient fact. Space has dimensions. What you are saying is that that can be measured is not physical. How tall are you?

Space contains stuff, in your rather childish analogy, it contains balloons

The properties of balloons are not the properties of space, perhaps this is where your confusion lies

 

[james blunt]

Been here before and you appear to ignore inconvenient fact. Space has dimensions. What you are saying is that that can be measured is not physical. How tall are you?

Space contains stuff, in your rather childish analogy, it contains balloons

The properties of balloons are not the properties of space, perhaps this is where your confusion lies

The only true dimensions that exist in space are the dimensions of atomic matter and the dimensions of field matter . Matter has physicality where space does not .

XYZ is a finite relative measurement of none physical space is the correct semantics .

Space has no properties , properties of matter occupy space .

 

[ratiocinator]

3 dimensional is a limited visual in a n-dimensional space ! Matter is physics , dimensions are metric measurement , arbitrary relative !

Did this word salad mean something in your head before you started typing? The fact is that the space we live in is physically three dimensional and physically has (approximately) Euclidean geometry. Neither of those are logically necessary.

 

[james blunt]

Did this word salad mean something in your head before you started typing? The fact is that the space we live in is physically three dimensional and physically has (approximately) Euclidean geometry. Neither of those are logically necessary.

I think you are really confusing yourself and don't understand what physicality is .

physicality
Dictionary result for physicality
/fɪzɪˈkalɪti/
noun

1. the fact of relating to the body as opposed to the mind; physical presence

Space has no physicality , bodies occupies space . Physics of bodies is independent from space .

The space we live in is not physical , physical occupies space .

Measurement is relative !

 

[ratiocinator]

I think you are really confusing yourself and don't understand what physicality is .

And I think you haven't got the first clue what you're talking about. The dimensionality of space is not in the mind (referring to your dictionary definition - not that it's really relevant), it's a real physical property of space - as is its geometry.

 

[ChristineM]

The only true dimensions that exist in space are the dimensions of atomic matter and the dimensions of field matter . Matter has physicality where space does not .

XYZ is a finite relative measurement of none physical space is the correct semantics .

Space has no properties , properties of matter occupy space .

Wrong, of course i have explained this to you before from physical dimensions to quantum particles, including providing a scientific definition of space.

I did expect you to educate yourself, seems that hope has been dashed. So i won't waste any more of your, or my time except to offer you a little education on that which you deny

NASA : Physical properties of space
Chapter 2.

 

[james blunt]

And I think you haven't got the first clue what you're talking about. The dimensionality of space is not in the mind (referring to your dictionary definition - not that it's really relevant), it's a real physical property of space - as is its geometry.

The dimension as a measurement is of our minds , it is relative . We invented measurement , it is relative to us . We didn't invent space .

 

[james blunt]

Wrong, of course i have explained this to you before from physical dimensions to quantum particles, including providing a scientific definition of space.

I did expect you to educate yourself, seems that hope has been dashed. So i won't waste any more of your, or my time except to offer you a little education on that which you deny

NASA : Physical properties of space
Chapter 2.

''Space seems empty but contains valuable resources of energy and matter and dangerous fluxes of radiation. ''

Space itself is empty but contains valuable resources of energy and matter and dangerous fluxes of radiation.

P.s Contain is the wrong word ! Space has an occupancy of energy etc .

 

[ChristineM]

''Space seems empty but contains valuable resources of energy and matter and dangerous fluxes of radiation. ''

Space itself is empty but contains valuable resources of energy and matter and dangerous fluxes of radiation.

P.s Contain is the wrong word ! Space has an occupancy of energy etc .

Changing words to suit your sensibilities does not change the finding of science

 

[ratiocinator]

The dimension as a measurement is of our minds , it is relative . We invented measurement , it is relative to us .

Nonsense. You absolutely need three numbers (and a reference point) to define a position in space. Two isn't enough and a fourth is redundant. We didn't invent that constraint. It is a real, physical fact about the universe.

 

[james blunt]

Nonsense. You absolutely need three numbers (and a reference point) to define a position in space. Two isn't enough and a fourth is redundant. We didn't invent that constraint. It is a real, physical fact about the universe.

It's a physical fact is it ? Numbers themselves are not physical , 3 points of coordination is imaginary lines that are relative !

 

[ratiocinator]

It's a physical fact is it ?

Yes.

Numbers themselves are not physical

But they are used to represent physical things, like, in this case, distance.

3 points of coordination is imaginary lines that are relative !

Are you actually trying to deny that space is objectively three dimensional? Just thought I'd check...

 

[james blunt]

Changing words to suit your sensibilities does not change the finding of science

Contain yourself !

 

[james blunt]

Are you actually trying to deny that space is objectively three dimensional? Just thought I'd check...

I'm not trying to deny it , it is a fact that space is not objectively 3 dimensional . Infinite space has no dimensions. Dimensions are finite relative space . You don't know much do you ?

 

[ratiocinator]

I'm not trying to deny it , it is a fact that space is not objectively 3 dimensional .

So, space does have physical properties - so much for postulate 7.

Infinite space has no dimensions. Dimensions are finite relative space .

Back to word salad...

 

[james blunt]

So, space does have physical properties - so much for postulate 7.



Back to word salad...

No, space doesn't have physical properties because it is not made of anything . You are mistaking the semantics and what physical properties are .

 

[ratiocinator]

No, space doesn't have physical properties because it is not made of anything .

So what is it that is objectively three dimensional, then?