MigL

Why has no one commented on the fact that Sorcerer, in post #27, gave the wrong definition for non-commutation ? It should be... A*B==B*A commuting A*B=/=B*A non-commuting

I'd rather have Ripley than Tony. ( Not that there's anything wrong with wanting Tony ) Oh, that's not what we were talking about ?!?!

The gear 'chamber' still needs to have fluid pumped into it for lubrication, and AFAIK drain holes carry this back to the pan. Thickening of the fluid due to temp degradation, metal/friction particles from a failing tranny, or even just plain dirt can clog these drains and lead to foaming. That being said, foaming doesn't seem to be much of an issue these days, hi-temp degradation is. I've always owned GM, but my current transaxle on a V6 MDX doesn't even have a replaceable filter, and I've always done a couple of flush and fills with hi-quality synthetic fluid ( never mind what Honda/Acura says ). I use Amsoil fully synthetic ( no one else, not even Mobil 1, is fully synthetic anymore ) for both tranny and engine.

Since the body is an adaptive organism, its not always damage, but change. As an example, uv causes skin cancer, but, it also makes cells produce melanin, which is a good defense against skin cancer. The cancer, or damage if you will, only occurs when the body's adaptive processes ( or repair mechanism ) is overcome. I got all my vast knowledge about adaptation and evolution from the first ten minutes of 2001:A Space Odyssey.

If you try to visualize what the probability distribution would look like for non-trivial probabilities, it would probably be densest in a certain area and gradually diffuse out towards the edges, i.e. a 'cloud'. Is it any wonder that images show the same ?

Sorry studiot but what I was trying to do was, start from a false premise, and show that it leads to inconsistencies. And I would say, on second reading and as elfmotat pointed out in a previous post, made a 'dog's breakfast' out of it. JonG is also right in stating that it is language that fails us as it is open to interpretation. In the example I used, I was trying to define an object which exists simultaneously in the past ( 5 units ), present, and future ( 5 units ), but that is already inconsistent as simultaneously means 'at the same time'.

I would have to agree... It should be your personal choice whether to use drugs or not. But once you make the chice, you are responsible for anything that happens while under the influence. Just like you can't drink and drive, come to work drunk, or excuse stupid, boorish behaviour as the alcohol's fault, so should it be for other drugs. You only have the right to do drugs as long as it doesn't infringe on my right to be safe.

I live in Ontario, Canada and we probably have the largest fresh water reserves in the world per population. I don't water the lawn ( you should see the weeds ) I shower at work when I can ( 7 days out of 14 ). My water bill is still a couple of hundred dollars ( Can ) for a 3 month period. A few yrs ago our municipality told us that no maintenance had been done on the sewer systemsince the 60s. They then proceeded to double our water bills.We pay for water coming in AND water going out. But I still don't see any sewer upgrades or maintenance being done ! Its not lackof natural resources that'll be the death of us, Its the mismanagement.

You can stop and rewind your dreams Strange ? I can never rewind to the part just before the hot girl slaps me !

All transmissions, manual or auto, have some means to relieve pressure. the lubrication pump/system takes care of things in a normally filled engine/transmission. Foaming,in a transmission or an engine, occurs when rotating parts ( crankshaft weights in an engine, rotating gears in a tranny ) splash in the overfilled oil/fluid reservoir or crankcase. Foamy oil or transmission fluid, I would think, is not as good a lubricant or heat transporter. This splashing also leads to excessive fluid temps, the tranny fluid degrades very quickly, and the transmission ( auto ) fails.

But what causes the trascription errors Strange ?

I don't do laTex so bear with me... Lets assume an object does extend in time like it does inspace. In effect we measure the object to occupy spatial co-ordinates ( Xi, Yj, Zk ) for i,j,k=1 to n. We again measure it at a later time to occupy the co-ordinates ( Xi, Yj, Zk ) for i=10 to n+10. It has moved 10units along the x axis. Now lets apply the same argument to the temporal dimension. Say at time Tn the object extends through time by ten units equally spaced about Tn, i.e. from n-5 to n+5. Now we repeat the procedure at Tn+5 such that the object now extends fom n to n+10. It has moved into the future by 5 units. The temporal co-ordinates between Tn and Tn+5 are now double booked, an impossibility. Either objects cannot extend through time, or Michel123456 is right,and previous times vacate their co-ordinates. I choose to believe that objects don't extend through time, and past co-ordinates are not vacated. Sorry, studiot posted before I did and abandoned the temporal extension question and went back to the role/validity of the observer in a spatially reduced model.

So, just to be clear,have we estabilished that pos and neg are just a convention, except for some add on effects in cases that don't satisfy mirror symmetry ( chirality ) ?

Although I can see the need for solar radiation ( never mind what the sun-block manufacturers tell you ), I can't see a need for particulate ( alpha, beta, etc. ) radiation.

One more stab at it... All physical objects extend in space across multiple co-ordinates like your ruler does. But if Michel123456 is wrong about previous ( in time ) co-ordinates being vacated, then... No specific object can extend in time across multiple co-ordinates because the previous same object would occupy some of those co-ordinates. But do objects extend in time across multiple co-ordinates in the same sense that your ruler extends across the 300 space co-ordinates ?

Not mine. Myopic since age 5, diagnosed with PDS glaucoma at 37 after losing vision in left eye, filtering surgery at 39 and cataracts removed a few years ago. But I can still work and drive, although its an adventure in bad weather.

Haven't you ever read Flatland, Studiot ? Not sure I understand your question in post #59 either. But if you were a sphere your world line would be a world TUBE. Or have I misunderstood ?

Soap bubbles expand and contract at different rates because of the soap film between them, otherwise they would tend toward equilibrium of the contained gases, i.e. equalized pressure. What do you propose is separating these domains of the universe ? Also separate domains arising because of differences in symmetry breaking lead to other issues. The creation of magnetic monopoles at the boundaries is one such,that I first read about in Guth's Inflation. As far as I know, the consensus is either infinite and unbounded ( no explanation needed ) or finite and unbounded ( such as a sphere's surface ). Unbounded because there cannot be an "outside'.

When I was younger I wanted a deLorian with a Flux Capacitor...

Back in the old days, real men ( and women ) learned processor specific assembly. I could probably still write some Zilog Z80 code.

What exactly would be happening at the boundary between a region that is expanding (becoming less dense ) and a region that is contracting ( becoming more dense ) ? Does this make any sense to you Airbrush ? Finite or infinite, both can expand by simply expanding separation. . As for the observable universe, the areas that are receding from us superluminally ( unobservable ) were once within our observable universe. As a matter of fact, before the inflationary period, areas of the universe which have vanished beyond the horizon of the observable universe were in causal contact, i.e observable. IIRC there are mathematical models for finite to become infinite, but it would take me a lot of searching as these were provided by Dr Rocket.

But that's not what theory or interpretation says, Michel123456. If we consider space as 2dimensional, then we would have a sheet with a spot on it denoting your current position. The time dimension adds a multitude of additional sheets, or foliations, with your position at various times, past and future, forming your world-line. None of the previous time co-ordinates are vacated, nor are future co-ordinates empty. Your world-line is fully populated for all times. This is what makes it difficult to consider the passing of time as motion through the time dimension. Remember also that GR is fully classical and does not take into consideration Quantum indeterminacy and this would, at very least, affect the 'fuzzyness' of the world-line. That may be one of the reasons that it is easier to think of the foliation representing the 'present' ( a hypothetical construct ), moving foreward through the time dimension at a rate dependant on the local curvature ofspace-time, i.e. normally in locally flat areas, slower in strong gravity fields, and not at all at a BH's event horizon

Now that's what I call 'hitting the nail on the head'.

Nothing is an abstract concept just like zero. One apple means you have an apple, but zero apples means no apples exist. Similarily 'nothing' does not exist, but as a concept,it facilitates reasoning such as logic and math. It also cannot exist physically, as there are things and processes which cannot be separated from any area of space-time.

And I thought I was getting old and cynical... Some of you guys need to do some drugs and be a little happier.