When we take a direct measure of phenomena, to the best of our calculations, this only becomes a close approximation.

When we take the derivative/integral of this measure- it only becomes more distorted.

When we take the second derivative/integral- it only becomes distortion upon distortion. Pretty soon, our second generation derivatives/integrals become inaccurate and unusable to physicists.

This seems the opposite in mathematics, that, when we start extrapolating our measures, they become more precise and accurate. When we have an area under the curve, and the area does not move and is a "solid foundation", then, yes, the derivative/integral become more accurate as we generate.

But, physics deals with these areas through motion. Motion is bound to distort from the observers' point of view.

One will have to, eventually, decide on whether to become a physicist, who measures the reality of motion/non-motion; or a mathematician, who measures shapes and areas "under the curve", without motion.

Maybe, one has to do both at the same time.

GogoJF: "But, physics deals with these areas through motion. Motion is bound to distort from the observers' point of view."

Jose: Motion and the delay of the light signal over distance.

Relativists assume that the three axis of Cartesian coordinates are mysterious "dimensions," to which a fourth, perpendicular to the three, and named "time dimension" is added. Their whole theory depends on calling the three axis of the imaginary Cartesian scheme some physical attribute, and then labeling the whole fabrication a "Space Time Continuum."

What a goofy religion!

Is it a religion because you are too stupid to understand the simple things the theory of spacetime tells us?

- it is a religion because anonymous idiot is stupid enough to believe it,

GogoF,

The Newton's law of motion is indeed based on a second derivative called aceleration (sic).

Acceleration measurements, specially on short times, are more noisy than the measurement of a position.
This is a result from standard error calculation theory.
However, when experiments can be carried out on long period of times, an acceleration can be measured with an arbitrary precision.
This is well illustrated by the early astronomical observations that have led to the Newton's law of motion. Measurements were no so precise as today, but observations over years could easily compensate for that and this triggered the spark of science (and the declined credibility of religion).

Today, celestial mechanics is renowned for its extreme precision.
Small relativistic corrections are even needed to match today's precision of the experimental data.

If you want to learn physics, I can only encourage you to learn math and physics.
You should avoid using empty words as most people in this forum.
You should also use only first-hand and well selected references.
The www.physicsforums.com would be a better place for you than this forum here.

Anonymous:
I visited the website, physicsforum.com, it just seems too categorized. I prefer to talk on a smaller website. Although, you may not believe this, I think AAF, Jose, Bobs, Pentcho, Aaron, among others including yourself of course, are enough to get the ball rolling, don't you?

No, GogoF, when I am here I only write stupidities, like the others.
I don't know your age and your background and you goal, so it is difficult to give a good advise.

Assuming you are at the secondary school and want to get a master in physics, I would advice that you get to best possible notes in maths and physics as well as other scientific topics. If you were older than 16, I would also suggest you to try to learn a subject by yourself in an introductory book. Avoid the internet as much as possible: it can be very useful only if you can separate the trash from the best. I hope you have access to a good library. Note however that Amazon and google books could be helpful.

Anon: Maybe you should figure out who you are. Do some internal dialog, before typing. Are you being of benefit to the conversation? Some of us want to re-evaluate physics. Just to see if the theories work, or like religion, is it just a bunch of BS.

Look at the axioms. Mass has no dimensions. Gravity is based on mass. Thus neither is real.

These concepts may have gotten us our of the middle ages, but they will not progress science. Especially the don't question Newton part.

GogoJF: You got it right.
"When we take a direct measure of phenomena, to the best of our calculations, this only becomes a close approximation.

When we take the derivative/integral of this measure- it only becomes more distorted.

When we take the second derivative/integral- it only becomes distortion upon distortion. Pretty soon, our second generation derivatives/integrals become inaccurate and unusable to physicists."

Anonymous: "Is it a religion because you are too stupid to understand the simple things the theory of spacetime tells us?"

Jose: It is a religion because you cannot obviously fathom my logic in the above post. You are in a sealed box. Everything you encounter is filtered through the tiny hole in the box called "spacetime."


Relativists assume that the three axis of Cartesian coordinates are mysterious "dimensions," to which a fourth, perpendicular to the three, and named "time dimension" is added.

"Time" and "Space" are apples and oranges. In Euclidean space, Time has three axis in Cartesian coordinates, just like space. You cannot add a fourth axis that is perpendicular to the existing three, except in your imagination. When you do you have to imagine something like "Minkowski space," where the "time" axis is twisted around to whatever direction is currently being considered. There are not four "dimensions," one being "time." There are two aspects to reality, or existence: Euclidean space and Euclidean time.

Jose, there is no cure for your stupidity.

Jose,

I thought about what you said in relation to my model. Not to Euclid or others.

Information travels in 3 directions and rotation. This may or may not be 4 dimensions since the rotation occurs in the same space as the direction. But it is not rotating in the same direction as the general motion direction. Nor does the rotation have the same properties as the information.

Thanks
a

"You cannot add a fourth axis that is perpendicular to the existing three, except in your imagination."

Indeed, imagination is what you miss the most, JR.

On my ID card, my place and date of birth are indicated.
Anybody can understand that, except you.

Anonymous has said: "Jose, there is no cure for your stupidity. Indeed, imagination is what you miss the most, JR.
Is it a religion because you are too stupid to understand the simple things the theory of spacetime tells us?"

Jose: The above comments from your posts simply prove my surmise: It is a religion because you cannot obviously fathom my logic in the above post. You are in a sealed box. Everything you encounter is filtered through the tiny hole in the box called "spacetime."

I admit that you are not stupid, nether am I. You are cognitive dissonant, however, and a donkey cave. You remind me of the most elastic substance mentioned in the bible: Elijah tied his ass to a tree and waled into town.