## Friday, 25 September 2015

### Apparent Only Options - illustrated by a sudoku row ...

... or what remained of it when previous boxes were already filled in, five boxes left.

Bold style, small numerals = options, as had.

Normal style, normal size = solutions, alternative or consecutively consequent.

The options given as had depend in part not just on the row previous to it, but also on what square and what column they are in. I here ignore that option 2 for second box was already off, as I already had that one in the square while examinating this row.

47924782847278
2
28
28 7
2847
92847
47924782847278
4
4 7
94 7
9428728
47924782847278
7
7 4
97 4
9728428
47924782847278
8
82
82 7
8247
98247

So, first box needs to be a nine ? What about possibilities 4 and 7 ?

47924782847278
4
4  7
4 28728
4 ?28728
47924782847278
7
7  4
7 28428
7 ?28428

Actually, there is another reason why first needs to be a nine, which I had overlooked. No other box is open to a nine, so it is the only place one can put it.

The lesson of this is that a "why can't" doesn't always work.

My adversaries would apply this to my question "why can't angels be dancing the so called parallax with the stars". I would apply it to their "all parallax observations are dependent on Earth moving around the Sun each year". Except that, when it comes to negative parallax - my reason - and this observed by the Tycho experiment, they would make exceptions. Obviously a parallactic movement of a star has to be opposite rotation to that of Earth, it cannot be "negative", i e cannot be same apparent rotation as Earths real rotation. Their solution : some of the observations are not accurate. My solution : Earth is not moving. It is angels dancing with the stars. Well, their "some observations are not accurate" is defeating their position. If so many observations are inaccurate, how could we know any are accurate?*

Hans Georg Lundahl
Bibliothèque Audoux
St Cléophas of Emmaus
25-IX-2015

* A bit like the 4 or 7 options leading to a question mark too.