X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109d8a,d285c0422982fd10,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid109d8a,public
X-Google-Thread: 10cc56,d285c0422982fd10,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid10cc56,public
X-Google-Thread: 10b271,d285c0422982fd10,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid10b271,public
X-Google-Thread: f996b,d285c0422982fd10,start
X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public
X-Google-Thread: 1110fe,d285c0422982fd10,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid1110fe,public
From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Subject: Vietmath War: Einstein Dysprosium on Peano Axioms of Math
Date: 1997/01/01
Message-ID: <5aeect$hij@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 207148784
distribution: world
x-authenticated: Archimedes.Plutonium on DND host dartmouth.edu
organization: PLutonium College
newsgroups: 
 sci.physics.electromag,sci.math,sci.physics,sci.logic,alt.ascii-art


In article <5aedhv$po1@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>
Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) writes:

>   In another thread Einstein Dysprosium in Vietmath will be another
> article and I hope to seek out the help of Colin Douthwaite in possible
> ascii art of this.

--- quoting from THE MECHANICAL UNIVERSE ---
There are two possibilities. One of them  is this. The 
loop is held stationary,  not moving, and I take the magnet and I move
the magnet into the loop. That causes the current to flow. Now that
case  the charges in the   loop were not themselves in motion, so it
can't have been the magnetic field of the bar magnet  that made them
move 
but since they did move
There therefore was an electric field and so we conclude that 
a changing magnetic field, moving the bar magnet, created an electric
field. And that of course was Faraday's great discovery of
Electromagnetic Induction in the 19th century.
And that is one explanation of that experiment.
Now there is another completely different, independent explanation and
that goes this way.  Suppose instead I hold the bar magnet stationary
and I move the loop.  Now of course exactly the same thing happens. But
in this case we have no moving magnet,    no changing magnetic field ,
but instead, the charges in the loop are moving because I am moving the
whole loop.  They have the velocity v and this velocity crossed into
the magnetic field of the bar magnet gives us a force  which causes the
current to flow and that also describes perfectly well  the experiment
that we just saw.   So those two different phenomenon that is to say
this, loop stationary and magnet moving and this,      
magnet stationary and loop moving are actually two completely distinct
independent phenomenon that have completely different  explanations.
When Albert Einstein saw that he said look guys, you just got to be
kidding any yoyo can see that those two things are the same thing .  So
it was this simple little experiment that was really the starting point
of the theory of relativity,  not the Michelson Morley experiment. Not
some exotic  experiment to detect the motion of the Earth through the 
ether. But this simple little phenomenon  that of course everybody knew
about, but which disturbed nobody else , except , Albert Einstein.  And
what disturbed Einstein was not that we had difficulty explaining this
phenomenon this equation explains them perfectly in every case. What
disturbed Albert Einstein was the lack of inner perfection of the
theory and what he did in response was to produce a theory the Special
Theory of Relativity which had just that kind of inner perfection.
--- end quoting from THE MECHANICAL UNIVERSE ---

  The inner perfection

How many people can see that the Successor Axiom of the Peano Axiom
System

  is the same identical Series 

as the Series of the definition of what a P-adic, (an Infinite Integer)
is.

So far, I am the only and the first human to see that these two are
identical.

What does this mean? It means that Naturals are the P-adics and that
the old Finite Integers were a imprecise and foggy unclear concept.


Physics has inner perfection, and math does also, but of course math
has inner perfection for all of mathematics is but a minor subset of
physics. Math is physics only where the experimentation is usually just
pen and paper. And no math theorem (theorems are fancy words for
physics experiment using just pen and paper). No math theorem is as
important as any physics experiment. Let me say that another way. All
physics experiments are more important than any math theorem
(experiment) because all physics experiments usually draw more than pen
and paper and imagination into the experiment itself, and in the case
of the above physics experiment they draw from the world magnets and
loops and electrical devices.

  Would Colin Douthwaite or someone please draw a ascii picture of the
professor moving a bar magnet through loop and then loop through bar
magnet. Sincere thanks