Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:36:06 -0500
Sue... wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:34 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:SR is based on Minkowski spacetime, in which there is
no matter at all, so there's no "background" of the type you mean.
the universe that we know of seems rather devoid of matter-free
experimental arenas.
Yes. Nobody expects SR to be a good model of the world we inhabit. After all, it is only a LOCAL APPROXIMATION to a much better theory, GR. But GR is so difficult to use, and SR is such a good approximation in so many situations, that for the majority of physics experiments SR is an appropriate model to use for analysis; indeed for many experiments Newtonian mechanics (an approximation to SR) is good enough.
> [... irrelevancies omitted]
Tom Roberts
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: Sue...
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- References:
- Mach's principle and aether
- From: Amine
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: harry
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: Amine
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Mach's principle and aether
- From: Sue...
- Mach's principle and aether
- Prev by Date: Re: Will it ever be possible to view an atom?
- Next by Date: Re: Mach's principle and aether
- Previous by thread: Re: Mach's principle and aether
- Next by thread: Re: Mach's principle and aether
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|