Re: A String Is, String Does

Posted by eaglesondouglas on November 24, 2003 at 18:39:25:

In Reply to: Re: A String Is, String Does posted by sol on November 24, 2003 at 09:38:36:

A U(1) as a test of the applied string is a good relation of theory to consider. A symmetry of time as a truely existing manifestation in physical theory is allowed to be true for consistency with a larger set of U.

I do not believe it is really true, except it is required for the string. I like the string form of theory and consider it the theory to sligthtly adjust to transcend the quantum and relativity dillemma.

And so to allow the symmetry of the reversal to be resolved, I give it a true force relation. I would term this Einstein Force, because it is a resolution to the dilemma of relativity.

And so the need to allow a formulation in relation to the theory of geometry is another comment. A geometry in Euclid's works is not amenable to transformation in order to obtain any theory statement benefit. A geometry allows the function to exist.

And so its transformation will appear only a class of function. It is interesting as a form of statement, but it would cause confusion in my opinion. An aethetics choice.

A form of geometry was chosen where the point is always existing. Euclid's. And to alter in order to state the string function is valid and solves the larger topology dilemma of Euclid.

He allows a student to now say, I do not know the method of causing a geometry theory to be used as the topolgy. A geometry would have no capacity to do so.

And so the abstract geometry is amenable to the same usage except for it reason to exist becomes a geometries statement. Now impling the point as a valid transformation.

And if this is the usage, it is techiquely a topology point.
An amazing transformation of geometry.

And the large question of the theory of topology is left to a larger answer. Meaning all points in topology can be considered a string in your usage.

I was taking the large answer and stating the function in the topology.

Making the test a validity of the point.

And so the capable student is now claiming a test of the valid point a thing to consider for a while, and answer later. I need so time for that one.

Maybe take the geometry as the means to cause a topology inverted in abstract form transformation?

And here the point becomes a funny consideration. An abstract geometric location.

And so the third abstraction of a particular point must be the dilemma resolved. A dilemma as to the need for a function of any relation.

Implying an answer of this abstract cause to any function. The relation for a point transformation.

Again a third abstraction becomes the implied topology .....

Well, that is where I need to simply quit for now.

Abstract location in Euclids geometry is a rather hard necessity to resolve. Some would say the applied geometry has a point for a relation of the point.

Making a full resolution a test abstractly applied to any geometry and once again a transformation of the point solves the abstracted location.

An applied point causes a euclid's location to become a location of the abstract necessity and never an applied location in a geometry. A falasy in euclid's geometry, but a cause of a true abstracted geometry.

Making the geometry location a ......??

So, I need somemore time. I get lost here. A cause to location appears a theory's existence and nothing more. And a location in all theory is then the dilemma.

Making the necessity for topology or geometry anwser the abstract location. What is the common test for location???

And here a relation defining a points usage rather than its existence, presents a test.

And this abstraction is found only the means to cause a topology for any geometry.

Again a form of test solves the applied point. A point of either, abstract location or its abstraction. And here abstract necessity for any topology resolves the point.

Making euclid's geometry necessity answer the question.

And so a form of answer is the concept of applied abstraction. Why does any relation abstractly define.

A definition without relation to location. What is abstract theory???

And here validity of the theory's form simply enforces topology's need for abstraction of a common variable called a constant. Implying a number appears for ever point.

And once more a hard question appears to annoy the eazy need for location.

Douglas Eagleson
Gaitherburg, MD

(Report this post to the moderator)

Follow Ups: (Reload page to see most recent)

• Such Fuzziness Gives Way to Certainty? -- sol 11/24/03 (0)

Post a Followup

Name    :     (Save your login cookie)
Password  :     (Delete your login cookie)
Subject : 

Comments:

(The following are optional.)
Link URL   : 
Link Title : 
Image URL  :