I think we should just drop it. It seems to be getting personal, and I certainly had no intention of that. By "exponential", I simply meant expanding rapidly. As I've confessed previously, my mathematical terminology is sadly lacking. For that matter, the entire reference to expansion is likely a misconception as well. Your point is taken.bhobba said:Have you stopped to consider it actually doesn't make sense? Which it doesn't BTW eg exponential - where exactly that comes from beats me - actually it doesn't beat me - its a symptom of what I have been saying.
Well, then some tip: If you invest such a long time in reading "many books", why then don't you read the right books? It's fun to read one or two popular-science books. The problem is that most of them are very bad. It's very difficult to write a good popular-science book also for experts in the field (and you should sort out any popular-science book not written by an expert in the field, i.e., a scientist working in it). So if you are willing to spend several years in reading books, read good textbooks. You'll need to study a lot of math first, then classical mechanics and some classical electrodynamics to get used to the mathematical tools, but that's fun too!cube137 said:Please note that Hobba and Neumaier are Ph.D. in mathematics so they don't have patience in dealing those below undergraduate in mathematics or physics. Advisers who are most patient are the rest like atyy or mfb. I guess the quantum physics forums have to be divided into two.. for undergraduates and for advanced laymen. We are advanced laymen who struggled for years reading many books.