>>13483950>no it is not, because we have the tools of mathematicsAnd the universe uses this math?
>what you ask to do is not possible, however visualizations exist, they are only approximations in 3 dimensionsSo why not just be simple and stick with "one dimension". Why complicate it with "3". What is the purpose?
>>13483952>You are trolling or have down syndromesMormon Jesus must do it then right? Gravity describes the mass accelerating but not the mode by which caused it to do such.
>>13483953I deny that wikipedia articles should mentioned, especially when Wikipedia denies that their articles should be taken seriously. Also
>>13483954>Your pilpul tactics will not work on me kike.I'm not arguing. I'm not telling you what to think. I'm not peddling a irreconcilable dualism for you to solve.
>Notice how you only use words but never bring up the actual equationsI'm pretty sure I've laid out the fact that I don't care for descriptions. Show me the cause, numbnuts.
>Your jew brain can only understand words. It is not complex enough for math.Math is simply the language of quantification. When it comes across something it can't quantify, it fails miserably. Kind of like how someone can be at a loss for words when he can't explain the cause of something, so he instead repeats the same description over and over but slightly modifying it some with the introduction of new, descriptive, fancy words. Only instead of words, math does it with quantities.
>>13483959>Bending of light around massive objects?Like my shadow bends around objects?
