1.0   If it's a sphere, just point!

The mathematical physicists invoke points to define lines and lines to define points. Once established, these fundamental
'figures' serve as building blocks for planes and solids. Neither the point nor the line are used to construct alleged 4-D
figures known as the hypersphere and the tesseract.

In Science, we do it a little differently.  We don't use points or lines at all because there is no purpose for them. In Science,
we deal exclusively with solids and use the word plane to refer to the face or side of an ideal 3-D geometric figure. We
invoke concepts such as edge and surface to describe some of these solids.

In Science, we are also required to present an exhibit. This could be the genuine article, a mockup, a statue, a drawing, a
photograph, an illustration, or any other static image. The prosecutor must absolutely point to Exhibit A for the jury to
visualize what she is talking about. An ET would otherwise be unable to visualize or follow her theory.

Here's an example that illustrates why this is necessary. I think of an animal. I explain that it runs at 30 miles per hour,
jumps, roars, eats voraciously devours smaller animals, scratches its back on trees, and leaves large footprints. Do you
know exactly what animal I am thinking of? Let's now try a description. I say that this animal has four legs, 2 ears, 1 mouth,
2 eyes, and brown fur. Still unsure? We could go on with a more comprehensive list of explanations and descriptions and
never reach the bottom of it. You would never have the same idea that I have of what I am talking about. A picture is worth
a thousand words! I point to a bear or to a lion or to Inostrancevia and say one word.  We're done. Nothing more needs to
be said. Now I can describe what you are visualizing to improve understanding and communication.

In Physics, the process is the same. We point to a cube and say one word: cube. A picture is worth a thousand words.
Now we have a ballpark idea of what the prosecutor is going to talk about. The prosecutor can now describe what the
jury is staring at in more detail. She can describe some of the properties the cube has, such as 6 faces, or 8 corners, or
6 edges. She may use adjectives such as equal, or flat, or continuous.

So far we didn't need any math to understand what a cube is. Indeed, it is perplexing that such objects are found in
encyclopedias of Mathematics rather than of Physics.

The relativist may participate as devils advocate and ask how we know that this figure is a cube, i.e., that it has six equal
square sides, etc, etc.

We don't.

How do we distinguish a cube from a rectangular solid such as a rectangular cube or box, that is stretched in one
direction?

Again, we don't!

When the prosecutor uttered the word cube and pointed to Exhibit A, the jury needed no more details to get a feel for a
cube. When she further described it, the jury got an even better idea of what an ideal cube would be. For the remainder
of the presentation, this object will be a cube. A description can be added and the jurors asked to suppose that this is an
ideal cube.

Hence, once we point to a cube and described it we have a 'definition' of the word cube that we can use consistently in a
dissertation. We have communication. We understand each other. The jury visualizes the object the prosecutor is talking
about. We can now proceed to point to a face and call it a square. The square is naught without the solid behind it. The
square is not infinite any more than a cube is infinite. There are no infinite structures in Physics, nor any that we can
imagine. So those pondering infinite objects are not describing or explaining the real world or even dealing with the ideal
world of Geometry.

However, a cube is easy. It is a static figure with 6 sides and three dimensions. What is there to know about it? No one
studies cubes in Mathematics because i would be like repeating kindergarten.

A sphere is a different matter. The sphere is the devil's mysterious gift to Mathematical Physics. It utterly confuses them.
To this day, the mathematicians coming out of college cannot tell you unambiguously how many dimensions a sphere
has. That's how much the sphere has thrown the mathematicians off.

In Science, this issue is a no-brainer. A sphere, like all other solids, is 3-D. It has length, width, and height. We're done!
There's nothing to argue. There's no ambiguity. No one can interpret anything other than what the eyes see.

But now we engage in an irrational dialogue...

2.0   The sphere of Physics

Mathematician:  "Our sphere is hollow."

Bill: "How can it be hollow if you defined it as having a point in the center?"

Mathematician: "Forget it! Make believe I never mentioned it! We just use it to construct our sphere."

Bill "Oh!"

Mathematician: "And this is a geodesic, a line drawn along the surface of the sphere. This straight line is the shortest
distance between any two points on the surface.

Bill: "But the line you drew looks a little curved."

Mathematician: "Well it is curved in the 2nd and 4th dimensions. Not in our 3-D world."

Bill: "Oh, I see. However, it seems like a shorter route is through the diameter."

Mathematician: "Now be honest. Can you go through the center of the Earth from Europe to Asia?"

Bill: "But the Earth is solid... kinda like a bowling ball. You said your sphere is an empty balloon. What prevents you
from traveling through your sphere if it is hollow?"

Mathematician: "Well, we, the mathematicians, are in the majority and we overrule you."

Bill: "Oh! Ooookaaaay... I think I understand now. Is it possible to stand on your sphere?"

Mathematician: "Of course not, you fool! Can't you see that the surface has no thickness?"

Bill: "You mean, the entire shell is zero-dimensional?"

Mathematician: "Right, dummy! Finally!"

Bill: "But I thought you said that the surface was made of points."

Mathematician: "Yes! And a point is zero dimensional."

Bill: "How come I can see a dot there."

Mathematician: "You really are out of this world, Bill! That dot you see there is just a pictorial representation of a
point. You are not supposed to take it literally! Our point is 0-D... you know... a location. A point is just a number...
an ordered pair... a set of coordinates! Can you perchance stand on a pair of coordinates? What is it that you don't
understand? "

Bill: "So let's see if I got it right. The mathematical sphere is a set of equidistant points from a center point which
does not belong to the sphere. All of these points are not geometric figures such as a dot. These points are really
locations which form a shell, the smallest component of which is just an ordered pair. All these locations enclose
absolutely nothing, zip. But I cannot travel through this emptiness because of the unbearable friction that will be
generated between me and this void.  It seems to me that you mathematicians have absolutely nothing so far.
How can you locate locations on a 'surface' made of ordered pairs which encloses both hollow and massive
nothingness? What sense does any of this make?"

Mathematician: "Ah, Bill!" What can I say? This stuff is way over your head. You probably need to take an introductory
course in Math to understand what a sphere is (Fig. 1)."

In Physics, it is not half as complicated. We point to a ball and say sphere. We're done. Even a child understands. But just
in case, we clarify for the mentally disadvantaged mathematicians that a sphere is a solid and not a 'hollow'... like their
brains. When we say 'sphere', we treat the object as if it were made of a single piece. The object sphere is not made of
parts or points or components. We visualize it in a single frame of the film.

The mathematicians may claim that they can't use this figure, that it has no purpose for them.

Science doesn't care whether a mathematician has any use for an object. This is what a sphere is.  That's what we
objectively have before us. We don't 'understand' a sphere. We VISUALIZE it, see it with our eyes. And we don't watch a
movie of a sphere being built. We view it in a single image. Once this phase is over with you can do anything you want
with it.
 Fig. 1   The Emperor’s Sphere
 A relativist ‘explains’ a sphere and nevertheless ends up with absolutely nothing. The sphere of Mathematical Physics consists of a bunch of zero-dimensional points or 1D curves equidistant from a center. When a relativist is finished with his explanation, there is nothing to see. The mathematicians may claim that this is their version of the sphere, the one they use in their discipline. No problem! But then, this is not a geometrical object and cannot be used in Physics!

 Okay boys! Hurry up and get those pins up because here comes the real sphere of Physics. You too, Al!
 The sphere of Physics
 Adapted for the Internet from:Why God Doesn't Exist

________________________________________________________________________________________