Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 29 Sep 2005 02:14:54 -0700
You are implying (claiming?) that a conceptually false theory like SR
is on an equal footing with e.g. Newton's first law because both don't
apply exactly, but nevertheless make good predictions that match up
with experiments.
You should realize that Newton's first law doesn't lead to logical
aberrations like "mutual time dilation". As SR ignores that two clocks
moving at different velocities wrt a same clock which can be considered
at rest (like the track clock in your example or a CMBR clock) don't
tick at the same rate (contrarily to its prediction), one should not
call it a correct theory. Otoh, predictions like time slowing or mass
increase of particles moving at high velocities are not an exclusivity
of SR.
Marcel Luttgens
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: Androcles
- Re: The true crackpots
- References:
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- 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: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: mluttgens
- Re: The true crackpots
- From: PD
- Re: The true crackpots
- Prev by Date: Re: The true crackpots
- Next by Date: Re: Bile awski the Janitor.
- Previous by thread: Re: The true crackpots
- Next by thread: Re: The true crackpots
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|