Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: Bilge <dubious@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 07 May 2007 17:09:01 GMT
On 2007-05-05, John Kennaugh <JKNG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
John Kennaugh wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
What "physical process" makes it be _straight_?As per Newton's laws of motion.
This is not at all a "physical process".
I did not say it was.
If you like it is an axiom of physics that 'straight' is natural and
a physical process is required to change it from that natural state.
So you DON'T really expect a "physical process", even though you have
repeatedly demanded one.
I don't expect a physical process when none is required.
This is in essence an assumption that Euclidean geometry applies
(geodesics in E^3 are where "straight lines" come from).
Laws of motion have nothing to do with Euclidean Geometry.
Wrong. As soon as you assume some geometry for the universe, the
laws of motion follow.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: vern
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- References:
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: bz
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- Prev by Date: Re: Aether; was Re: Can somebody please help me with understanding this Michelson Morley setup?
- Next by Date: Re: Doppler paradox
- Previous by thread: Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- Next by thread: Re: Photon, Momentum, Mass
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|