Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: "Juan R." González-Álvarez <juanREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:42:41 +0200 (CEST)
Shubee wrote on Tue, 01 Apr 2008 19:23:45 -0700:
On Apr 1, 8:03 am, "Juan R." González-Álvarez
<juan...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The geometric view of gravity as spacetime curvature is not just one of
many myths promoted by relativists but one without experimental basis.
Not only do relativists promote the geometric view of gravity with
religious enthusiasm, they are absolutely antagonistic to all other
logical interpretations.
Shubee
An example i know is the speed of gravity myth.
First, it can be proven that the retardation arises on GR e.g.
h_MUNU = 4G Int d^3x {S_MUNU(x t_ret) / r}
is not fundamental but retardation (t_ret) arises from the geometric
(local) approximation to gravitation.
That is, GR and its retarded interactions are just an approximated view.
Second, so-called tests of GR can be matched also with theories of
instantaneous action at a distance without spacetime curvature: see, for
instance a first attempt on
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612019
That work can be extended to include also *radiation*. Another common
myth by relativists is that radiation cannot be explained by action at a
distance theories and needs of retardation and fields.
Once i tried to explain some of those issues to certain academic
relativist now on this newsgroup. He completely misunderstood i said,
decided not to read references provided and started certain /ad hominem/
attack against me (where in a very unfair way he even attributed to me
stuff i *never* said).
You cannot dialoge with that kind of people. Nobel Prize for physics Max
Planck coinned the phrase:
{BLOCKQUOTE
A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and
making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually
die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
}
--
http://canonicalscience.org/en/miscellaneouszone/guidelines.txt
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Juan R.
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- From: Shubee
- Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Prev by Date: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Next by Date: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Previous by thread: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Next by thread: Re: The Traditional Superficial Explanation of Relativity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
