Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: "Curious" <anthonyroseuk-curious@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 May 2005 07:33:07 -0700
Multiple misunderstandings here.
1. I wasn't referring to any specific paradox, but it is my impression
that relativity requires that there be no absolute frame of reference,
and if there is one, that paradoxes arise. If that is not so, please
ignore the phrase "in an absolute frame".
2. I used emotionally loaded words - sorry. What I meant by "shoved
over into philosophy" was simply that instead of saying "we don't know
yet", physicists are saying "that's not our department". I would
suggest that there is a universe out there that gives rise to many
questions - some we need measurements to answer, some can be answered
by careful logic alone (eg. cogito ergo sum). All questions are the
province of any field, if not to answer (yet), at least to defend. If
philosophy shows some physics theory to be illogical, then it's time to
modify it, not build a wall.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: Curious
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: Harry
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: shuba
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- References:
- SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: john_doe_ph_d
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: Harry
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: Curious
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: harry
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: Curious
- Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- From: harry
- SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- Prev by Date: Re: How long is a muon when at rest?
- Next by Date: Re: A dumb question about time..
- Previous by thread: Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- Next by thread: Re: SR Postulate on Speed of Light
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|