Recent comments

  • Reply to: De Blasio Support Plummets Among Jews   1 day 1 hour ago

    Nobody doubts the mayor's support of Israel but that is not going to get him Jewish support any more than such Zionism from folks like Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz will get them such support. Anti-Israel positions constitute a negative political litmus test for Jews; pro-Israel positions are more or less expected certainly here in NY. The mayor has staked out his position: he is the candidate of the leftists ( like the very leftwing Jews For Racial & Economic Justice mentioned in this article), Al Sharpton and blacks and hispanics who like Al Sharpton. He will lose the white/Jewish vote if there is a credible opponent against him such as Ray Kelly. The mayor is correctly perceived as a white Dinkins and we know what happened to Dinkins politically (and note De Blasio just unilaterally renamed the Municipal Building for Dinkins.)

  • Reply to: Security Measures Questioned In Teen’s Murder   1 day 15 hours ago

    Dear Anonymous,
    With all due respect, the only display of negligence and irresponsibility is your misplaced finger pointing at the victims. The heinous murderer and only the murderer is to blame. As we sadly know there is nowhere in Israel that is immune from terror attacks perpetrated by Islamic extremists, whether in the roads of Gush Etzion where tens of thousands travel everyday, Tel Aviv or Afula. As someone who anonymously sits in judgment behind the comfort of his or her keyboard (I am an IDF officer who served many years as an infantry soldier and former student of Yeshivat Har Etzion), I am genuinely interested in hearing what activities should be conducted by any post-high school program in Israel and how you think these senseless acts of terror can be prevented.


  • Reply to: U.S. Teen’s Murder Posing Dilemma For Modern Orthodox   2 days 5 hours ago

    Bar Ilan University is in Ramat Gan and not Jerusalem.

  • Reply to: This Year In Kaifeng   2 days 5 hours ago

    Beautiful story !

  • Reply to: A Fresh Look At Einstein   2 days 10 hours ago

    Actually it turns out there is a problem in the elementary geometry underlying the general theory of relativity. Einstein said that “in the presence of a gravitational field, the geometry is not Euclidean.” At that time Euclidean geometry and non-Euclidean were seen as both logically consistent (just not logically consistent with each other). .When Hilbert added the coordinate line to geometry, virtually everyone in the twentieth century took Hilbert’s system as a correct foundation, including Einstein.Yet there was a flaw that resulted from adding a coordinate system. The non-Euclidean geometry then becomes self-contradicting!

    When Hilbert added the features to comprise the real number line and coordinates, the very earliest axioms required subtle modifications. From Euclid's to draw a line from one point to any other, and extend it in a straight line, Hilbert first produced, two points determine a line and determine it completely. But this eventually became every pair of points is in some line (Axiom I. 1) and two different lines cannot contain the same pair of points (Axiom I. 2) (paraphrased). This 'line' is what became a coordinate line.  Yet Axiom I. 2 is incompatible with one of the two types of non-Euclidean geometry (geometry with no parallels), and this is not the only problem. Then there was a problem with the remaining type. Apparently virtually no one had thoroughly and correctly reexamined the implications indicated by the subtle modifications of those elementary axioms.  

    Math with coordinates or angles, was based on Hilbert's Theorem 8 [5 in earlier editions of his book] about a line dividing a plane in two, and on the SAS triangle congruency theorem (12). Hilbert said that based on Theorem 8, Theorem 10, which expanded the structure to three dimensions, expressed "the most important facts about the ordering of the elements of space."

    Hilbert proved Theorem 8 based on his Axiom I. 2, one of the modified axioms, and on Pasch's triangle axiom, which Hilbert believed was an independent foundational axiom, common to Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry, including that remaining type. Theorem 12 (SAS) presupposed Theorem 8. However, contrary to what Hilbert believed, the triangle axiom was not an independent foundational axiom. It was a proposition that combined a more elementary triangle axiom and Hilbert's Axiom of Parallels which Hilbert called "Euclid's Axiom." This Axiom of Parallels, "Euclid's Axiom," was a logical equivalent of the original Playfair's axiom, which was the logical substitute for Euclid's famous fifth postulate added by Playfair to Euclid's geometry in 1795.

    Why the non-Euclidean geometry is self-contradicting is explained in short order in a brief Facebook Note, that explains how general relativity lost its coordinate system. Part II of the Note explains how this was overlooked throughout the twentieth century: