Quote
I'm still trying to figure out why she would post a link to an article about time and space as a direct for you to quantum physics.

Maybe she is studying some big ideas and getting largely confused.

probably still the wrong direction though. maybe she is stuck in a big physical time-space warp.

not very quantum of her.
The article's about spacetime, in particular it's about mathematically modeling time as the 4th dimension. This is a separate issue thrown in as a distraction (not by LL but by Einstein & his fans in general).

It overlooks the fact that everything travels through time on a given vector, and there's no way to apply force and accelerate/decelerate in that vector. Time isn't a spacial dimension. After wasting time with this crap when learning Special Relativity, they try to slip in a 4th spacial dimension (for a total of 5 dimensions in spacetime). I know General Relativity requires the 4th spacial dimension, and I'm pretty sure SR does too (I forget the details just now).

The formula for teaching this stuff hasn't changed much. First they focus on making you doubt things you know to be true. For example they always claim parallel lines aren't really parallel if you follow them far enough. Let 2 people start side by side and walk north. At first they're paths are parallel, but they meet at the north pole. This is deception. The trick doesn't work if they walk east or west because those paths truly are parallel. After a few days of preconditioning with similar drivel, they dive into Einsteinian Relativity & dupe many into accepting things they otherwise wouldn't.

The math works on paper, but so what? There's no 4th spacial dimension and everybody knows it. I can program a computer to simulate a dozen dimensions. More actually - the limit depends on the programming language. But modeling a thing doesn't make it real. Before anyone says it does, keep in mind we have flood models!

Practically speaking, the primary purpose of the 4th spacial dimension is to provide a waste basket. There are probably a hundred paradoxes that have been cataloged over the years for SR and GR. Any time someone demonstrates something can't happen, or is required to do mutually exclusive things, they can claim that when such a situation occurs the object will vanish into the 4th dimension.

I ain't making this up. Google Ehrenfest's paradox for a fine example. Einstein himself "resolved" it by "curving" the disk into the 4th dimension. When you understand the game, it's as sad/funny as evolutionism.

And the parallel lines thing? Einstein never proved lines can't be parallel. Anyone good at math'd put a serious smackdown on such a proof.** Does SR or GR require that lines cannot be parallel? If so, they're unsound. If not, why must they always precede any class on SR with this false, irrelevant teaching? Actions speak louder than words.

**Note that they use a real-world story to teach falsehood about math & use math to teach falsehood about the real world. They can't prove their math from math, and they can't show a 4th dimension in the real world.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson