The 'number of numbers' definition of dimension cannot be used consistently |

Adapted for the Internet from:Why God Doesn't Exist |

Fig. 1 One-dimensional space? |

Fig. 2 The 3-D cube of Physics within the 2-D sphere of Math |

So what we do in these cases, Bill, is bend the dimension! |

The mathematicians have developed a ridiculous and blatantly erroneous notion of dimension. First, the word dimension of Mathematics has nothing to do with architecture (i.e., length, width, and height) It has to do solely with motion. Mathematics is a discipline unconcerned with structure. It exclusively studies dynamic situations. Then, the mathematicians deflect the itinerary of a traveling object and continue labeling it one-dimensional for reasons they only know. The trajectory has encroached on a second 'physical' dimension, but in Math, for unknown reasons, they call it the 2-D. The root of the problem is that the morons of Mathematics confuse straight with forward! In the idiotic religion of Mathematical Physics, anything that travels forward is traveling straight,and as long as you continue traveling forward, you are traveling 'one-dimensionally'! (So Bill? Why is it that you say that the mathematicians of the world are a bunch of stupid idiots?) |

sphere is two-dimensional (2-D) because they

can locate a point on its surface with two

'dimensions,' by which they really mean

coordinates. Actually, the morons are not

talking about either. They are talking about

number lines known as parallel and meridian.

For unknown reasons they leave out the

number line known as radius and which runs

from the center of the sphere to its surface.

For the purposes of Physics, a sphere is

three-dimensional (3-D) because it has length

width and height. We can show this quite

simply by sticking a 3-D cube inside a sphere.

This is the only context in which we can use

the word dimension

The mathematical definition of dimension is

(i.e., religion).