No, he was arguing we couldn't have an _experience_ of non-euclidean geometry. Have you had an non-euclidean experience? Do you perceive in reimannian geometry? Or, do you use a (quasi) euclidean form of perception to attempt to re-present your account of what is non-euclidean?
*I say quasi because it seems like Euclid made certain assumptions about geometical axioms _because_ the axioms corresponded to the way we experience the world. So euclid described our forms of experience, our forms of experience aren't what conformed to Euclid.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he was arguing we couldn't have an _experience_ of non-euclidean geometry. Have you had an non-euclidean experience? Do you perceive in reimannian geometry? Or, do you use a (quasi) euclidean form of perception to attempt to re-present your account of what is non-euclidean?
*I say quasi because it seems like Euclid made certain assumptions about geometical axioms _because_ the axioms corresponded to the way we experience the world. So euclid described our forms of experience, our forms of experience aren't what conformed to Euclid.
I wager that long bets will only be a remnant in Google's cache before the blog bet finishes.