Re: The real twin paradox.

Sue... wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
[...]
Sue has a bold new concept in science here: agreement with a
theory's predictions means rejecting the theory.

No... There is nothing new about it at all.
It is nearly 100 years old:

No idea what you're on about.

That is glaringly obvious.

Look, you said *I* offered a URL, then noted that it does not
speak to the topic at issue. Well I did not bring it up here;
you did. I don't recall where I offered that URL, but I'm sure
I did not promise that it would always be on-point for any
discussion. You post these irrelevant tangents because you do
not understand the subject.

Relativity predicts the twin's phenomenon. A scientist cannot
accept a theory and reject its implications. You had it exactly
wrong.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_dollar_paradox

Do you understand why no number of experiments
will prove a bellhop's ability to cause dollars
to vanish even tho there is math to suggest
it is possible?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

More irrelevant nonsense, though if you are that confused by
the missing-dollar, no wonder relativity baffles you.


--
--Bryan
.

Quantcast