Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: shuba <tim.shuba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:17:50 -0500
Ben wrote:
There is no hope. The concept of time
differing according to the velocity of the observer is hard to grasp,
and probably 99% of the laity rejects it as ridiculous and can never
be persuaded otherwise.
Usenet trolls are not representative of people with general
interest. Perhaps a more fundamental problem with your
persuasive skills might be that the tortured idea about changing
clock rates is horse*** pedagogy. Presumably, if someone asks
about the height of your house, you do not give different answers
depending on how far away from it you are located. Nor, I would
suppose, would you describe the refraction of the image of a
stick half in water as an example of the stick no longer being
straight. Yet, you are perfectly happy to mislead beginning
students by analogous reasoning when the subject is relativity.
---Tim Shuba---
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Uncle Ben
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Androcles
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- References:
- Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Uncle Ben
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- From: Uncle Ben
- Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- Prev by Date: Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity
- Next by Date: Re: Spaceman's muddle
- Previous by thread: Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- Next by thread: Re: Is "malfunctioning" absolute or relative?
- Index(es):