Re: Classical and modern physics
- From: "Mike" <eleatis@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 14 Sep 2006 02:41:01 -0700
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
There are problems enough in modern physics. If we want more problems we can
go back to classical physics. Or we can start solving those problems, but it
will be the most difficult thing to do.
http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
Henry Haapalainen
"A reward awaits
You will win 1000 US dollars if you can come up with an argument that
invalidates this theory of gravity as falling space, ... [snip] .... My
reputation would not allow me to break my promise. "
Your reputation is already none given the fact that you resort to the
fallacy of "reversing the burden of proof". The burden of proof is on
you to prove your theory and until you do that, it worths nothing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(logical_fallacy)
By the way, you can start by showing mathematically how "falling space"
gives rise to elliptical orbits of the planets around the sun.
I'm waiting for your proof crank.
Mike
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Classical and modern physics
- From: Henry Haapalainen
- Re: Classical and modern physics
- References:
- Classical and modern physics
- From: Henry Haapalainen
- Classical and modern physics
- Prev by Date: Re: Lorentz factor in GR?
- Next by Date: The Twin Paradox explained from the moving twin ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Classical and modern physics
- Next by thread: Re: Classical and modern physics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
