Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 46   [ 901 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 46  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:50 pm 
Offline
Resident Philosopher
Resident Philosopher
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:28 pm
Posts: 11087
Location: Playing Guitar for Siggy's Choir...
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 2nd Deg. KoC, SSFJDOG
gherkin wrote:
Swede1875 wrote:
Doom wrote:
I am reading a truly wonderful book called 'Why People From Scandinavia Should Be Banned From All Message Boards', it is extremely persuasive and will definitely influence my moderating decisions for a long time to come.


:roll:


I read that one last year. It was great. Almost as good as the sequel, Why Mathematicians Should Be Banned From All Message Boards.


This one is my favorite. I read it at least once a year.

FJ

_________________
Ut est rabidus.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:41 pm 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33222
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
:shock:

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:33 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:34 pm
Posts: 29123
Location: Sine Domum
Religion: Roman Catholic
Let see

Book alpha of the Metaphysics (Aristotle)

Right now I am on book 4 of the Physics, where he treats of time.

Reading the questions on the Trinity in the Summa (q.27-43). Just did q. 13, 14, 18, 19 as prelimnaries

Hegel's Phenomenology of the Spirit (just read his Philosophy of History)

Reading John of St. Thomas's Concursus Theologicus (in a horrible edition which was made worse by being mimeographed by someone ignorant of Latin).

Reading several anti-Pelagian tracts of Augustine (De Spiritu et littera, de correptione et gratia, de dono perservatiae, de praedestinatione sanctorum)

Reading Lobachevsky and his utterly false geometry. About to read Dedikin

Reading questions 5 and 6 of Aquinas' Commentary on Boethius' De Trinitate (aka the Division and Method of Sciences)

_________________
Quoniam sapientia aperuit os mutorum, et linguas infantium fecit disertas.

http://stomachosus-thomistarum.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:30 am 
Offline
Master
Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:47 am
Posts: 3919
Location: A state capital on a salt creek.
Religion: None
The everlasting Man, and The man who know too much, by G.K. Chesterton

_________________
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Tu ne cede malis
Vincit omnia veritas


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:05 am 
Offline
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 2493
Location: normally in New Mexico ... but I wander.
Religion: Mt 16:18
I'm in the middle of a terrific book on Jewish prayer: "Praying like the Jew, Jesus", but Timothy Jones. Also, finishing the Holy Father's book "Jesus of Nazareth."

_________________
"People who have come to know the joy of God do not deny the darkness, but they choose not to live in it."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:54 am 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 40006
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
Pro Ecclesia Dei wrote:
Reading Lobachevsky and his utterly false geometry.

What is "utterly false" about hyperbolic geometry?

Or maybe you were employing -- er, hyperbole?

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:21 am 
Offline
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:03 pm
Posts: 4154
Religion: Catholic
I have started to read "Triumph" I like it a lot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:25 am 
Offline
Handmaids of the Lord
Handmaids of the Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:34 pm
Posts: 11229
Location: With my beloved.
Religion: Catholic
Keating's "Catholicism and Fundamentalism" and Fr. Lukefahr's "The Privilege of Being Catholic"

_________________
During His trials Our Lord would not respond to the chief priests (Mt 14:61), or Herod (Lk 23:9) or Pilate (Jn 19:9). Words had failed. All that could penetrate those hardened hearts was the witness of divine love, the offering of His life to the Father. So also for us — when words fail the greatest way to “win” an argument is by acts of love. - Fr. Paul Scalia

There is no law about nougatine. - Chef Stephane Glacier


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:34 am 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 76185
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
dcs wrote:
Pro Ecclesia Dei wrote:
Reading Lobachevsky and his utterly false geometry.

What is "utterly false" about hyperbolic geometry?

Or maybe you were employing -- er, hyperbole?



If I remember correctly, PED is a radical constructivist, only Euclidean geometry is valid, everything else is 'false' and only positive integers 'exist', all other numbers 'don't exist' or can be conceived only in terms of the integers.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:35 am 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 40006
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
viking wrote:
I have started to read "Triumph" I like it a lot.

It isn't without its problems, though. For example, Crocker writes about Protestants believing in predestination as if Catholics don't. He either doesn't understand the differences between Catholic and Protestant views on predestination, or didn't have the space to discuss them, or perhaps the book has been poorly edited. But I suppose that's a minor issue since it's not a theology text. It might give readers the wrong idea, though.

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:39 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:34 pm
Posts: 29123
Location: Sine Domum
Religion: Roman Catholic
Doom wrote:
dcs wrote:
Pro Ecclesia Dei wrote:
Reading Lobachevsky and his utterly false geometry.

What is "utterly false" about hyperbolic geometry?

Or maybe you were employing -- er, hyperbole?



If I remember correctly, PED is a radical constructivist, only Euclidean geometry is valid, everything else is 'false' and only positive integers 'exist', all other numbers 'don't exist' or can be conceived only in terms of the integers.


Even if I were not a constructionist, Lobachevsky is false, at least the treatise I am reading. Geometrical Investigations on the Theory of Parallels

It is certainly true that you can take many of the propositions and apply them to true geometry, but his imaginary geometry is false. He claims that he is doing plane, straight line geometry.

Straight lines are not asymptotic, and to posit a planar geometry that denies the 5th postulate denies something that is evidently true. The angle of parallelism is always 90 degrees in math when speaking of straight lines, but for Lobachevsky they are always less.

And so if you start from the principles that Lobachevsky does then his geomtry is false, at least starting with proposition 22. I am sorry but the angles in a triangle equal two rights, that is true; to state that they never do, but are always less than 2 rights is therefore false.

There are two takes one can have here. Either one claims we do not know which is true "Euclidean geometry" or "Non Euclidean geometry" because we do not know whether the 5th postulate is true. But that is absurd. Or one can reject the geometry as formulated by Lobachevsky, and apply most of his propositions to curved space geometry, in which case they are valid and just as true as Euclidean planar geometry. But even then not every single proposition can thus be tranferred. For instance propositions 32 and 33. These follow only through perverse thinking...denying the 5th postulate in the context of planar geometry, for the boundary line would, since the 5th postulate is true (and the law of non contradiction therefore says Lobachevsky is wrong), actually be a straight line, not curved and the circle would not approach it as you made you radius bigger and you would not get the monstrous idea of an infinite circle.

Though it is bizarre that if you take his circle with an infinite radius and make a sphere and do geometry on that sphere you get Euclidean geometry. Which perhaps should be a sign that Lobachevsky was wrong to treat his geometry as planar and should have seen it must apply only in curved space (like the inside of a trumpet)

_________________
Quoniam sapientia aperuit os mutorum, et linguas infantium fecit disertas.

http://stomachosus-thomistarum.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:45 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:34 pm
Posts: 29123
Location: Sine Domum
Religion: Roman Catholic
Oh, and while I think that number most properly applies to discrete quantity, and hence is a multitude of units (Euclid), I recognise an analogical use that arises when number is used to number magnitudes. Hence it is that we get fractions and even irrational numbers. But I think that it is obvious that is not what we first mean by number. Likewise I recognise a further extension when negative number is used to signify direction. But again, the first use which arises in the way we think is discrete quantity and negative quantity makes no sense (I have negative 5 horses?)...but anyways I am rambling now...

_________________
Quoniam sapientia aperuit os mutorum, et linguas infantium fecit disertas.

http://stomachosus-thomistarum.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:17 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:48 pm
Posts: 6826
Location: Shaolin
Religion: Catholicus Romanus
WorBlux wrote:
The everlasting Man, and The man who know too much, by G.K. Chesterton


Time well spent.

_________________
vir desideriorum


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:38 am 
I like to have a few books going at the same time...

Guds Vänner (Friends of God) - St. JoseMaria
Man and Women he Created Them - JPII
Medieval Reader (Anthology of various obscure and fascinating texts)
Pocket Book of Father Brown - Chesterton


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:13 am 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 76185
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
PED,

It was proved a long time ago (around 1890 to be exact) that Euclid's geometry and Lobachevsky's are both equally 'true'. Or to be more precise, that if one of them is 'false' then so is the other. So, if Lobachevsky's geometry is 'false' then so is Euclids.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:50 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:34 pm
Posts: 29123
Location: Sine Domum
Religion: Roman Catholic
Doom wrote:
PED,

It was proved a long time ago (around 1890 to be exact) that Euclid's geometry and Lobachevsky's are both equally 'true'. Or to be more precise, that if one of them is 'false' then so is the other. So, if Lobachevsky's geometry is 'false' then so is Euclids.

Have you actually read Lobachevsky? You are denying the law of non contradiction. I am not denying the validity of hyperebolic geometry btw, but I am denying that Lobachevsky's writings are true, because he does not actually attempt to do hyperbolic geometry. That is later and taken from him.

_________________
Quoniam sapientia aperuit os mutorum, et linguas infantium fecit disertas.

http://stomachosus-thomistarum.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:34 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder

Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:12 pm
Posts: 8880
Religion: Catholic
I am currently reading "My Life with the Saints" by James Martin, SJ


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:13 am 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 76185
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
Pro Ecclesia Dei wrote:
Have you actually read Lobachevsky? You are denying the law of non contradiction. I am not denying the validity of hyperebolic geometry btw, but I am denying that Lobachevsky's writings are true, because he does not actually attempt to do hyperbolic geometry. That is later and taken from him.


What Lobachevsky does is he first assumes that the fifth postulate is false, and then he tries to derive a contradiction from this assumption, and he does a bunch of stuff and concludes no contradiction exists, and that hence we have an alternative geometry. I am primarily a geometer, bu not expert on Non-Euclidean geometry, nevertheless I honestly don't know what you are referring to. :?

At any rate, you seemed to not like my description of your earlier as a 'radical constructivist', well, you have defended constructisvism in the past, so I assumed that your views hadn't changed since our last discussion. Or perhaps you didn't like my use of the word 'radical', well, that isn't a term of abuse, but merely descriptive. There are even books out there defending this philosophy on 'radical constructivism'.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:14 am 
Offline
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:03 pm
Posts: 4154
Religion: Catholic
So GCK, is the Father Brown a good starting point if you want to read Chesterton?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:19 pm 
Offline
Prodigal Son of Thunder
Prodigal Son of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:54 am
Posts: 40006
Location: Ithilien
Religion: Dunedain Catholic
Church Affiliations: AWC, CSB, UIGSE-FSE (FNE)
Doom wrote:
What Lobachevsky does is he first assumes that the fifth postulate is false, and then he tries to derive a contradiction from this assumption, and he does a bunch of stuff and concludes no contradiction exists, and that hence we have an alternative geometry. I am primarily a geometer, bu not expert on Non-Euclidean geometry, nevertheless I honestly don't know what you are referring to. :?

PED is saying that Lobachevsky creates a non-Euclidean geometry, which is fine, but then says that L. claims his non-Euclidean geometry is a planar geometry.

I haven't read L.'s book (though I have a PDF of it at home), so I don't know whether this is true or not, or whether perhaps PED misunderstood what L. was getting at.

_________________
Formerly Bagheera

"Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the King." (1 Peter 2:17)
Federation of North-American Explorers - North Star Group - How You Can Help


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 46   [ 901 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 46  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Jump to: