Re: The true crackpots
- From: bz <bz+sp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 08:54:51 +0000 (UTC)
mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx wrote in
news:1126787022.334038.135600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
> You are almost right to tell that "SR applies to inertial frames. There
> are really no such frames available on the surface of the earth."
>
> In fact, there are no such frames available in the whole universe,
> meaning that SR is nowhere applicable. How would you call such a theory,
> if not crackpottery.
All theories suffer the same shortcomings.
I would call it 'one of the best among the available theories'. I would say
that it is a subtheory of GR and that, along with GR, EEP, and, of course,
the other laws of physics, it was sufficiently accurate to allow us to send
spacecraft to distant planets.
Absent these 'physically untenable theories', such missions would have
missed their mark by wide margins.
-- bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+nanae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+sp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
.
- References:
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- Prev by Date: Re: The true crackpots
- Next by Date: Re: Closing Speed of Light? What about 'Departing Speed'?
- Previous by thread: Re: The true crackpots
- Next by thread: Re: The true crackpots
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|