Re: What are relativists?
- From: "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 09:05:10 -0700
Dear jem:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xUJhe.12379$sy6.6702@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
....
>>> "The true scientist must have faith and believe
>>> in the scientific method of testing theories, and
>>> not in the theories themselves.
>>
>> It isn't a faith it is a dicipline.
>
> It isn't a dicipline, it's a discipline. :)
>
> Good post, but does a relativist take the position
> that "absolute quantities cannot be defined"?
> Doesn't any invariant quantity qualify as an absolute quantity?
c is an invariant quantity. It is however not absolute to all
frames, for all paths that light can take. Only to local frames
is it invariant. Alpha serves to similarly tie down the other
big "invariant quantities".
Absolutes available then appear to be: death, taxes, and trolls
on sci.physics.relativity.
David A. Smith
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What are relativists?
- From: jem
- Re: What are relativists?
- References:
- What are relativists?
- From: Pentcho Valev
- Re: What are relativists?
- From: Baugh
- Re: What are relativists?
- From: jem
- What are relativists?
- Prev by Date: Re: Bending of light not well authenticated
- Next by Date: Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- Previous by thread: Re: What are relativists?
- Next by thread: Re: What are relativists?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|