curse

The ( false ) arrow of time is easy to imagine, Cliff,
but spatial time ( 4-D space ) isn't. For more on that, see:
" http://WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time ".

I can imagine a series of ( static, 3-D ) statues of
a horse in progressive stages of " motion ";
but it doesn't look continuous.

No wonder people have a hard time understanding General Relativity.
G.R. is best understood in terms of a centrifugal force and/or
a gravity well substracting/adding energy, resulting in red/blue shifts.

Then there's " The creation myth conflict ",
" The Bible vs. the lambda-CDM model ".
We're 4-D rocks ? static, immobile ?

In article ,
JeffŠRelf wrote:

The ( false ) arrow of time is easy to imagine, Cliff,
but spatial time ( 4-D space ) isn't. For more on that, see:
" http://WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time ".

I can imagine a series of ( static, 3-D ) statues of
a horse in progressive stages of " motion ";
but it doesn't look continuous.

No wonder people have a hard time understanding General Relativity.
G.R. is best understood in terms of a centrifugal force and/or
a gravity well substracting/adding energy, resulting in red/blue shifts.

Then there's " The creation myth conflict ",
" The Bible vs. the lambda-CDM model ".
We're 4-D rocks ? static, immobile ?


More Relfian pseudo-knowledge.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
JeffŠRelf wrote:

The ( false ) arrow of time is easy to imagine, Cliff,
but spatial time ( 4-D space ) isn't. For more on that, see:
" http://WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time ".

I can imagine a series of ( static, 3-D ) statues of
a horse in progressive stages of " motion ";
but it doesn't look continuous.

No wonder people have a hard time understanding General Relativity.
G.R. is best understood in terms of a centrifugal force and/or
a gravity well substracting/adding energy, resulting in red/blue shifts.

Then there's " The creation myth conflict ",
" The Bible vs. the lambda-CDM model ".
We're 4-D rocks ? static, immobile ?


More Relfian pseudo-knowledge.

What is it with "3D simulations" and sci.astro lately?

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Of doing Venus in person would obviously incorporate a composite
rigid airship, along with it's internal cache of frozen pizza and
ice cold beer."
-- Brad Guth, bigoted racist

In article ,
Art Deco wrote:

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
JeffŠRelf wrote:

The ( false ) arrow of time is easy to imagine, Cliff,
but spatial time ( 4-D space ) isn't. For more on that, see:
" http://WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time ".

I can imagine a series of ( static, 3-D ) statues of
a horse in progressive stages of " motion ";
but it doesn't look continuous.

No wonder people have a hard time understanding General Relativity.
G.R. is best understood in terms of a centrifugal force and/or
a gravity well substracting/adding energy, resulting in red/blue shifts.

Then there's " The creation myth conflict ",
" The Bible vs. the lambda-CDM model ".
We're 4-D rocks ? static, immobile ?


More Relfian pseudo-knowledge.

What is it with "3D simulations" and sci.astro lately?


I would call it a meme, only that would assume the saucerheads had a clue...

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

"Jeff.Relf" wrote in message
...
The ( false ) arrow of time is easy to imagine, Cliff,

Apparently not for you. Can you explain why events happen one after another?

but spatial time ( 4-D space ) isn't. For more on that, see:
" http://WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Block_time ".

There are not four spatial dimensions.