Re: Einstein's relativity, the postmodern patch to physics, must be neglected

On Feb 13, 10:28 am, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 13, 6:41 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Feb 13, 11:47 am, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 12, 10:12 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 12, 4:47 am, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Einstein's relativity (SR and GR) is the paradigm of postmodern patch.
A patch always presupposes the existence of the object to be patched.
You can't perform relativistic corrections if there is nothing to be
corrected. Postmodernism has only any sense if there were ever a
thing
called modernism. Einstein's relativity is then the postmodern patch
fixed upon the Emperor's old garment in order to repair it and cover
an awful hole. The funny thing is that patch is not made of the same
material the cloth of the garmet is made of, but of the fabric of the
hole, in such a way that the patch is intended to be fixed, not upon
the hole, but upon the rest of the garment. Once the patch is fixed,
the Emperor owns a New and Postmodern Garment!

Let's see what Noam Chomsky said when he was criticizing some aspects
of postmodernism,

                "There are lots of things I don't understand, say,
                 the latest debates over whether neutrinos have mass
                 or the way that Fermat's last theorem was (apparently)
                 proven recently. But from 50 years in this game, I have
                 learned two things: (1) I can ask friends who work in
                 these areas to explain it to me at a level that I can
                 understand, and they can do so, without particular
                 difficulty; (2) if I'm interested, I can proceed to
                 learn more so that I will come to understand it. Now
                 Derrida, Lacan, Lyotard, Kristeva, etc. even Foucault,
                 whom I knew and liked, and who was somewhat different
                 from the rest --- write things that I also don't understand,
                 but (1) and (2) don't hold: no one who says they do
                 understand can explain it to me and I haven't a clue as
                 to how to proceed to overcome my failures. That leaves
                 one of two possibilities: (a) some new advance in
                 intellectual life has been made, perhaps some sudden
                 genetic mutation, which has created a form of "theory"
                 that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth
                 and profundity; or (b) ... I won't spell it out."
                                                        -Noam Chomsky

Now I ask,
Is Einstein's relativity (a) option? Some advance in intellectual
life,
perhaps a sudden genetic mutation, which has created that form of
"theory"
that is beyond quantum theory, topology, etc., in depth and
profundity?
or is it (b) option, whose word Chomsky doesn't want to spell it out?

IMHO, the correct option is (b), and I'll spell that damned word out
for him: B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T.

Well, since relativity is easily an application of (1) or (2), then
the recourse to the evaluation (a) or (b) don't really apply.

If you are having difficulty with (1) or (2), perhaps it's time to
question the quality of the resources that you've chosen to bring to
bear.

PD

Go to a layman and tell him that A clock is ticking
slower than B clock, and also B clock is ticking slower
than A clock. Then, explain to him why is that true.

You don't understand. There is absolutely NO REASON why nature should
conform to common sense.

You don't understand. There is absolutely NO REASON why nature should
conform to SR.

Then why is experiment always - always - consistent with SR?

[...]
.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast