Re: What happened to Paul Miller?

From: Paul Miller (aksuited_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/22/04 

Date: 22 Oct 2004 07:09:25 -0700

Hey greywolf,

sorry, but the day job has taken over for a while, both for me and my
pal.

> Paul claimed that he was " ... not a physicist, nor a mathematician, nor do
> I claim any understanding of relativity." The only problem is that Paul was
> somewhat unwilling to commit himself to any substantive negotiations in that
> challenge.

Well, I would suggest that you specify the conditions of your
experiment that would predict the largest deviations from SR. In terms
of accuracy, as I'm offering 100-1 I would need accuracy at least one
order of magnitude larger, i.e. p<< 0.001 where p is prob. of getting
a wrongly falsifying result. I know I promised to get back to you with
more detail, but I really will. In the meantime, please show me some
reason to think that you have the resources to actually carry this
experiment out.

> "Paul Miller" did briefly resurface on September 10th:
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=4602c429.0409101048.5892c2ad%40posting.goo
> gle.com
>
> However, this post certainly does not sound like it is written by someone
> who " ... is not a physicist, nor a mathematician, nor ... claim(s) any
> understanding of relativity."
> ===========================
> "All you are saying here is that you could build an adaptive controller
> to make the corrections without having any knowledge of GR. So what?
> The claim 'GPS wouldn't work without GR' means no more than 'the
> controller would land up learning exactly the same corrections as
> those predicted by GR'. This puts GR in the same category as any other
> well-supported and well-accepted theory. You could train a neural
> network to model the predictions of any theory, past or future, so you
> 'empirical' statement applies to all theories. It tells us nothing
> about the status of those theories."
> ===========================

Sorry, but wrong again. If you must know, my background is in
cognitive science, not physics or maths. Just as I said first time
round.

Paul

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Comparisons between SR and LET.
    ... > must make identical predictions. ... > let them assert that LET and special relativity must be identical ... >>> mass, weak mass and strong mass, much less defining it all as inertial ... to the universality of the ether in GLET. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: How can I become an expert anti-relativist?
    ... > in general relativity as a prerequiste to being competent enough to ... > even need to have an in depth understanding of special relativity to ... only who understands the singularity theorems has truly understood GR, ... nor was I arguing against Einstein or Maxwell. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: How can I become an expert anti-relativist?
    ... >> in general relativity as a prerequiste to being competent enough to ... >> enough knowledge of physics to recognize when someone else doesn't ... >> It requires no knowledge of singularity theorems, ... > doubt that someone with a medium level of understanding can spot, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is it our math letting us down?
    ... overwhelming evidences in favor of special and general relativity. ... As for the SR corrections to GPS systems, ... you a completely quantified quantum Aether unit derived from empirical ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: cesium clock question
    ... JUST ONE interaction between a GPS satellite and a GPS receiver ... make light of the claim that General Relativity ... system engineers attribute to distance, velocity, acceleration, ... relativistic corrections will be the responsibility of the users (that ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast