An elementary question for the black hole experts

On Jun 18, 7:42 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 6/15/12 6/15/12 - 9:01 PM, TimeTraveler wrote:

Geometry is purely abstract.

Calling the geometry the model is your opinion. Koobee Wublee would
say that the geometry is reality. The geometry would be equally
realistic to any observers, and any interpretation to that geometry by
an observer is the model which can be abstract. How closely the
geometry is interpreted by the model reflects the intelligence, the
experience, and the knowledge in science of the interpreter. shrug

... we model the world using a spacetime manifold with metric; the "with
metric" part says that it possesses geometry.

You left out the most important thing. That is the coordinate
system. Only after a coordinate system is decided on to describe the
geometry, the metric only makes sense. The metric alone cannot be the
vehicle to describe/interpret the geometry, and this is a mistake made
by the self-styled physicists for over 100 years. sigh and shrug

Because dimensions and geometry are required to model the world we observe
around us.

In Koobee Wublee’s analysis, the dimensions are part of the geometry.
For example, looking at the beautiful scenery of (say) Glacier
National Park in Montana, the reality consists of 3 dimensions. After
taking a picture, the camera interprets the geometry as 2 dimensions
and hopefully and faithfully records it on a film or digital image.
shrug

Geometry does not "exist", in the sense of being in the real world. It "exists"
only as abstract ideas in the minds of humans.

Again, in Koobee Wublee’s take, the geometry exists, and it is very
real. An interpretation to the geometry is an abstract idea. shrug

Let’s compare Tom’s and Koobee Wublee’s takes on the example of a
speeding car coming towards Tom. In Tom’s take, the geometry is
abstract. Thus, Tom can just close his eyes and pretend not to see
the speeding car coming. In Koobee Wublee’s take, the speeding car
coming towards Tom is very real. It does not matter how Tom
interprets, but the reality remains that the speeding car is heading
towards Tom. If Koobee Wublee is right, the outcome is strongly
indicating a tragic end. shrug

Now, whose interpretation to the geometry is more valid pertaining the
study of physics? shrug

get rid of Minkowski's silly slogans about spacetime, and
the lightconeheads will finally have a picture ... okay,
a flipbook!

one shrug deserves a wave of'em

whose interpretation to the geometry is more valid
to the study of physics? *shrug