🚀 go-pugleaf

selflab@go.com (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<1305a9da.0304121322.1cee5301@posting.google.com>...
> shrikanthas@yahoo.com (Shrikantha S. Shastry) wrote in message news:<92a87ac5.0304070224.7bdfe213@posting.google.com>...
> > selflab@go.com (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<1305a9da.0304061314.4bf383f8@posting.google.com>...
> > > shrikanthas@yahoo.com (Shrikantha S. Shastry) wrote in message news:<92a87ac5.0304020124.369ed6bf@posting.google.com>...
> > > > selflab@go.com (Sergey Karavashkin) wrote in message news:<1305a9da.0304011315.55fbd920@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > shrikanthas@yahoo.com (Shrikantha S. Shastry) wrote in message news:<92a87ac5.0303292225.2f8fc42f@posting.google.com>...
>  [snip]
> > 
> > Well, again, my response was a general statement about the nature of
> > the universe. And so, all scientific conclusions are subject to the
> > illusory nature of the universe.
> > 
> > Now, how can there be singularities when all sinularities emerge at
> > zero? In other words, all singularities happen to be the same
> > singularity.
> > 
> > And how come that singularity is absent in nature? Is it
> > mathematically sound to neglect it, when outcomes are heavily
> > dependent on mathematical workout. Why this selective neglect? On the
> > contrary, singularity is basically important, as shown in my link
> > above, in relation to the observed universe.
> > 
> > It is this attitude of ignoring the essential singularity which has
> > hampered progress in science. The limited scope of science is
> > therefore artificial and its scope can be enlarged if singularity is
> > identified as it is.
> > 
> > And when the inherent singularity is recognised as the reality, its
> > observable universe turns out to be illusory. And so, the consequences
> > are inevitable. Is it the fear of these consequences which prevents
> > the acceptance of singularity? If one is looking for truth, then the
> > universe can only be known as it is, not as one wants.
> 
> I see, in the problem of singularity you understand only a nice word
> and nothing more. No one ignores the singularity, as you would like to
> imagine. There exists even a theory of singularities by N.P. Vekua:
> for example, his "Systems of singular integral equations and some
> boundary problems". The scientists treat them as an unavoidable
> consequence of our limited mathematical scope of modelling. Should you
> be more attentive when listening your lectures on physics, you would
> distinguish the concepts of surrounding reality and our images of this
> reality. And if you yourself whenever modelled some physical
> processes, you would know that the singularities disappear, when we
> introduce the finite size of a material body, the medium viscosity,
> resistance etc. But with it the complicacy of model description
> sharply increases. In most cases such complicacy doesn't lead to
> essential refinement of results. This is why there appear the point
> masses, charges, infinitely thin threads of vortexes and so on. Though
> this does not mean a least that it is basically impossible to take the
> mentioned factors into account. It's possible, and in many cases we
> account them in our problems. The singularities naturally disappear,
> there remain only the extremums with finite amplitudes. I already
> wrote you it, and this is not my fault that you are simply deaf. I
> understand the reason of your deafness, however this does not win you
> an honour.
> 
> It seems, you muddled up the newsgroups. People seeking for new
> religion would listen you open-mouthed and understand. They like to
> play words senselessly with a very clever faces. Sorry, as for me, it
> is boresome to read such ambiguous nonsense. There is nothing
> constructive. The more, I don't see, how this all concerns the subject
> of paper presented here.
> 
> Sergey.



Are you reluctant to recognise singularity by wishing away
singularities? Again, it is very important to know the nature of
singularity before any conclusions are made about the universe which
turns out to be illusory.

First of all, singularity by its unbridgeable gap with universe,
obviously negates the whole universe and even the zero at which it
occurs. Now, there is nothing else out there to deny singularity and
how can it disappear by itself, as understood by you others?
Singularity crops up in field theories inevitably, but in singularity
none of them are there. And so, singularity is deepest reality where
there is neither the universe nor its observers and hence what about
any theory?