What exactly is the "fabric" of Spacetime?

[Walker]

All those mutininos you cut and pasted up there don't mean squat to the average dummy like me, so make what you know relevant to what you know, daddy-o.

[Walker]

I'm not an english teacher. You've misread some stuff and got confused.

I should hope not. But as an adaptable human bean, you can try to be, which would make Spacetime explanations more relevant to those who speak English, such as Feynman.

[Walker]

Are you aware that for a so-called "english teacher" you write very clumsily, and with no other intended purpose than to just try to put 'the other' down?

Which, for one being a so-called "teacher", is very contradictory and very hypocritical. And, this is without even going into all of the inconsistencies that you have expressed here.

He's an English teacher? That's terrifying but also not surprising. He can't write for crap.

(I thought you said he was an English teacher.)

[Flannel Jesus]

Are you aware that for a so-called "english teacher" you write very clumsily, and with no other intended purpose than to just try to put 'the other' down?

Which, for one being a so-called "teacher", is very contradictory and very hypocritical. And, this is without even going into all of the inconsistencies that you have expressed here.

He's an English teacher? That's terrifying but also not surprising. He can't write for crap.

(I thought you said he was an English teacher.)

You don't know who the word "he" is referring to. It's not to me.

[Iwannaplato]

Are you aware that for a so-called "english teacher" you write very clumsily, and with no other intended purpose than to just try to put 'the other' down?

Well, if you had any memory, you'd remember that I have acknowledged that. I type fast and I generally don't go back to correct. Yup. Openly acknowledged. Not gonna feel shame or whatever you're hoping for.

And if someone misunderstood something, given one or more of these errors, I would admit the issue, as I have to you.

This is a very different phenomenon from when, for example, FJ explains what you did, quotes you, points it out yet again, and then you have no memory of this. You obviously did what he said, cannot seem to manage to take responsibility for it, keep expecting him to produce the same evidence again, imply all sorts of things about him, and produce redundantly overblown denials.

I know you don't understand what you are doing. So, it is rather pointless to say this to you, which is why you are not necessarily the target audience for this post.

Which, by the way, is retard communication. You aren't developmentally disabled, at least not in the sense people meant when they used 'retarded' as a pejorative adjective. But I understand FJ's label for some of your crap communication.

But anyway, keep on pretending. It is, as said, useful for dealing with people who play similar games in in-person interactions. Again, thank you for being an extreme version of a pattern that we encounter out in the world.

It is, inadvertently on your part, educational.

Oh, just in case you've already forgotten. FJ was quite correct in his description of what you said.

And in case you've already forgotten that, from cognitive dissonance or who knows what, FJ was quite correct in what he said about your communication which you denied a few posts back.

Oh, and yes, in case you've forgotten, you can keep bringing up that I am an English teacher and my errors and sloppiness here, but I will not feel shame about my typos here. You'll need to find some other target audience for that goal of yours.

[accelafine]

Are you aware that for a so-called "english teacher" you write very clumsily, and with no other intended purpose than to just try to put 'the other' down?

Well, if you had any memory, you'd remember that I have acknowledged that. I type fast and I generally don't go back to correct. Yup. Openly acknowledged. Not gonna feel shame or whatever you're hoping for.

And if someone misunderstood something, given one or more of these errors, I would admit the issue, as I have to you.

This is a very different phenomenon from when, for example, FJ explains what you did, quotes you, points it out yet again, and then you have no memory of this. You obviously did what he said, cannot seem to manage to take responsibility for it, keep expecting him to produce the same evidence again, imply all sorts of things about him, and produce redundantly overblown denials.

I know you don't understand what you are doing. So, it is rather pointless to say this to you, which is why you are not necessarily the target audience for this post.

Which, by the way, is retard communication. You aren't developmentally disabled, at least not in the sense people meant when they used 'retarded' as a pejorative adjective. But I understand FJ's label for some of your crap communication.

But anyway, keep on pretending. It is, as said, useful for dealing with people who play similar games in in-person interactions. Again, thank you for being an extreme version of a pattern that we encounter out in the world.

It is, inadvertently on your part, educational.

Oh, just in case you've already forgotten. FJ was quite correct in his description of what you said.

And in case you've already forgotten that, from cognitive dissonance or who knows what, FJ was quite correct in what he said about your communication which you denied a few posts back.

Oh, and yes, in case you've forgotten, you can keep bringing up that I am an English teacher and my errors and sloppiness here, but I will not feel shame about my typos here. You'll need to find some other target audience for that goal of yours.

You should feel shame you illiterate fraud. How much do you get paid for your nonexistent 'expertise'?

[Iwannaplato]

You should feel shame you illiterate fraud. How much do you get paid for your nonexistent 'expertise'?

Ahh, lovely. As vegetariantaxidermy you were much more on the ball when people made small or large spelling and grammar mistakes. Your delightful mixture of bile and pedantry has been missed in your new incarnation. As accelafine, the lack of content in your posts was then, well, less distracting, almost endearing. You were also more on the ball with insulting people as American. I hope nothing untoward has happened to you. In any case, you seem to be back with the wide range of contributions we expect from vt.

[Iwannaplato]

We have all heard of the term "the fabric" of spacetime.
What exactly does it consist of?

Events.

[accelafine]

You should feel shame you illiterate fraud. How much do you get paid for your nonexistent 'expertise'?

Ahh, lovely. As vegetariantaxidermy you were much more on the ball when people made small or large spelling and grammar mistakes. Your delightful mixture of bile and pedantry has been missed in your new incarnation. As accelafine, the lack of content in your posts was then, well, less distracting, almost endearing. You were also more on the ball with insulting people as American. I hope nothing untoward has happened to you. In any case, you seem to be back with the wide range of contributions we expect from vt.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Did it take you many hours to 'compose' that bloated drivel?

[Atla]

You should feel shame you illiterate fraud. How much do you get paid for your nonexistent 'expertise'?

Ahh, lovely. As vegetariantaxidermy you were much more on the ball when people made small or large spelling and grammar mistakes. Your delightful mixture of bile and pedantry has been missed in your new incarnation. As accelafine, the lack of content in your posts was then, well, less distracting, almost endearing. You were also more on the ball with insulting people as American. I hope nothing untoward has happened to you. In any case, you seem to be back with the wide range of contributions we expect from vt.

VT had one wish, to be born American, but fate did not grant it. No wonder she's so bitter.

[Iwannaplato]

You should feel shame you illiterate fraud. How much do you get paid for your nonexistent 'expertise'?

Ahh, lovely. As vegetariantaxidermy you were much more on the ball when people made small or large spelling and grammar mistakes. Your delightful mixture of bile and pedantry has been missed in your new incarnation. As accelafine, the lack of content in your posts was then, well, less distracting, almost endearing. You were also more on the ball with insulting people as American. I hope nothing untoward has happened to you. In any case, you seem to be back with the wide range of contributions we expect from vt.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Did it take you many hours to 'compose' that bloated drivel?

You fibber, you.

[Age]

Are you aware that for a so-called "english teacher" you write very clumsily, and with no other intended purpose than to just try to put 'the other' down?

Well, if you had any memory, you'd remember that I have acknowledged that.

So, you have already acknowledged that you write with no other intended purpose than to just to put 'the other' down previously, right?

Or, did you, once again, write clumsily here?

I type fast and I generally don't go back to correct. Yup. Openly acknowledged. Not gonna feel shame or whatever you're hoping for.

Well considering that you are not taking absolutely any responsibility at all for not wanting to write properly and Correctly here, then I suggest it would help you from professing to others that you are, supposedly, an "english teacher" here.

And if someone misunderstood something, given one or more of these errors, I would admit the issue, as I have to you.

When have you, previously, admitted, to me, one or more of 'your errors', when someone misunderstood some thing of 'yours'?

This is a very different phenomenon from when, for example, FJ explains what you did, quotes you, points it out yet again, and then you have no memory of this.

Why are you, once again, STUCK here on some thing, this time it is that I, supposedly, have 'no memory' of some thing.

What you seem to not be able to comprehend and understand here is that what "flannel jesus" is accusing me of I have NEVER EVER done.

And, the fact that you and "flannel jesus" have not, yet, been able to provide 'exactly where' I have, supposedly and allegedly, 'done' what you two believe, absolutely, that I have, further reinforces that I HAVE NOT.

You obviously did what he said,

Here is another prime example of what these adult human beings, in this forum would do, back in the 'olden days' when this was being written. That is; they would continually accuse another of doing, saying, or writing things, but when asked for actual proof, or even just some evidence, to be provided, they would not provide any, but just say or claim 'it is there'.

Look "iwannaplato" you here are now saying, and claiming, that I 'obviously did what "flannel jesus" said'. So, I will, once again, challenge you to provide this, supposed, 'obvious proof'.

If you do not, then 'that I, supposedly, did it', remains unproven. And, remains in thought and imagination only.

cannot seem to manage to take responsibility for it, keep expecting him to produce the same evidence again, imply all sorts of things about him, and produce redundantly overblown denials.

Of course I deny 'it'.

And, that you or "flannel jesus" have, still, not yet proved that I have done 'it', means that I will keep denying 'it'.

LOL That you believe, absolutely, that I have, obviously, done what "flannel jesus" said about when I quote someone and say that it is humorous and that this means that I agree with them, means that you are so very easily and very simply influenced, hypnotized, and suggestive.

I know you don't understand what you are doing.

LOL So, "iwannplato" believes, absolutely, that it 'knows' that I do not understand what I am doing.

Contrary to what you absolutely believe is true here, I know, exactly, what I am doing here "iwannaplato". "flannel jesus" is accusing me of some thing I say I have not done. So, I have asked "flannel jesus" to provide the exact words that would prove, once and for all, whether I have done what "flannel jesus" claims I have. I have informed "flannel jesus" that I could not see absolutely any thing in the words that it has provided, so far, that would even suggest that I have done what it claims I have. Then, you have, once again, 'butted in' here, and also claiming that I have, obviously, done what "flannel jesus" claims I have. I then challenged you to provide the actual words that proved I have. you also have not provided the 'actual words' that proved I have. So, what I am 'doing now' is waiting, patiently.

So, it is rather pointless to say this to you, which is why you are not necessarily the target audience for this post.

Great. So, you are, now, trying your very hardest to 'suggest' to the readers here that I have, supposedly, done some thing, and you are hoping that 'they' will start 'believing' what you have been fooled and tricked into 'believing' "yourself".

Which, by the way, is retard communication. You aren't developmentally disabled, at least not in the sense people meant when they used 'retarded' as a pejorative adjective. But I understand FJ's label for some of your crap communication.

That is the, supposed, 'crap communication', which 'you' a 'self-claimed, supposed, "english teacher" cannot or will not just copy and paste, and prove, once and for all, what you are alleging, accusing, and claiming here, right?

But anyway, keep on pretending.

'Pretending' 'what', exactly, "iwannaplato"?

I am in fully acknowledged DENIAL of what "flannel jesus" and 'now' you are accusing me of doing.

I am not 'pretending' absolutely any thing here.

It is, as said, useful for dealing with people who play similar games in in-person interactions. Again, thank you for being an extreme version of a pattern that we encounter out in the world.

It is, inadvertently on your part, educational.

Oh, just in case you've already forgotten. FJ was quite correct in his description of what you said.

LOL Once again, you can, very easily and very simply, make the 'accusations' and 'claims', but you will not provide any 'evidence', let alone the 'proof.

Just saying, "flannel jesus" was 'quite correct' in its description of what I said, but never ever saying nor writing down what 'it' is, exactly, that I have, supposedly and allegedly, said, is, really, saying nothing at all. As some would say.

And in case you've already forgotten that, from cognitive dissonance or who knows what, FJ was quite correct in what he said about your communication which you denied a few posts back.

'This' from a supposed "teacher" of the "english" language.

Oh, and yes, in case you've forgotten, you can keep bringing up that I am an English teacher and my errors and sloppiness here, but I will not feel shame about my typos here.

But, I have not seen a 'typo' from you, for a while now.

You'll need to find some other target audience for that goal of yours.

Why do you keep believing that 'shame' is what my writings are about?

Do you have some 'inner' or 'underlying' 'shame' going on, which you have not fully dealt with, exactly?

Look, this thread has become about 'me', allegedly and supposedly, saying some thing. (Which could not get much further away from the topic title of this thread.)

Now, if you and "flannel jesus" want to keep 'accusing' me of 'what I have, supposedly, done', then just provide the actual words that prove so.

It is not hard, nor complex, to do. I accused "henry quirk" of saying some thing. "henry quirk" wanted me to provide the actual words that proved 'my accusation' of 'henry quirk". So, I just did it.

Now, why will you and "flannel jesus" not just provide the 'actual words' that will prove "flannel jesus's" accusations of me?

Why does it seem so hard and complex for you two?

[Iwannaplato]

So, you have already acknowledged that you write with no other intended purpose than to just to put 'the other' down previously, right?

I should have been clearer.

No, only an extremely biased reader such as yourself could possibly conclude that that is my only purpose. Heck, you could respond to my post, in this thread, where I suggested an answer to the OP question. Or you can go on with your false belief about me. Up to you.

And as much as I take issue with a number of your patterns of communication, I do not assume that your soIe purpose is negative.

[Age]

So, you have already acknowledged that you write with no other intended purpose than to just to put 'the other' down previously, right?

I should have been clearer.

As a 'self-professed' "english teacher" being clearer would be more beneficial, to you, and to your communicating abilities, with others.

No, only an extremely biased reader such as yourself could possibly conclude that that is my only purpose.

But, were you not aware of how your writings here come across?

Heck, you could respond to my post, in this thread, where I suggested an answer to the OP question. Or you can go on with your false belief about me. Up to you.

This seems extremely hypocritical considering that you never responded to my post where I provided an answer or response to the opening post here.

And as much as I take issue with a number of your patterns of communication, I do not assume that your soIe purpose is negative.

Okay.

Do you know that I take issue with you making allegations, accusations, and claims and when you are asked to provide proof, or at least some thing, for your claims, accusations, or claims, you do not?

If no, then now you do.

[Iwannaplato]

As a 'self-professed' "english teacher" being clearer would be more beneficial, to you, and to your communicating abilities, with others.

Regardless of what one professes to be or what one has a work it is a good thing to be clearer. However there are other factors involved, which lead to me posting quickly. I have the ability to go over and correct and eliminate errors more than I do, but I prefer not to. Those who find the amount of errors irritating are of course free to read other people's posts and not mine.

No, only an extremely biased reader such as yourself could possibly conclude that that is my only purpose.

But, were you not aware of how your writings here come across?

To some, sure. But again, it was a false conclusion on your part that this is my only intended purpose. And I am sure you are aware of how your writings come across to many people here.

Heck, you could respond to my post, in this thread, where I suggested an answer to the OP question. Or you can go on with your false belief about me. Up to you.

This seems extremely hypocritical considering that you never responded to my post where I provided an answer or response to the opening post here.

You seem to be missing the context. This was in the context where you asserted my only intended purpose here is to put 'the other' down. So, in I suggested that you could have responded to a post in this very thread where that could not be seen as my intended purpose. It was not hypocritical, in context, to suggest that you could have done that.

Do you know that I take issue with you making allegations, accusations, and claims and when you are asked to provide proof, or at least some thing, for your claims, accusations, or claims, you do not?

Yes, I know that. On the other hand when I have done precisely that, it goes nowhere. And I have also gone into detail, several times, how it goes nowhere, and in what ways your approach to communication leads to that. I don't feel any obligation to continue certain processes with certain people when I have experiences that tell me it is a dead end. Of course, I may well try again at some point and I am not asserting a rule. Often, as here, I find that you write as if certain things have never happened when they have. Not unlike the assertion that my only intended purpose...etc.

Perhaps if bahman or Iambigious or VA respond to every post you make in response to them, you will find that you decide to discontinue the interation, temporariIy or Ionger term. Should that happen or is something similar happens, well, that's the kind of thing I experience with you.