Re: Uniform gravitational Field
antimatter33_at_yahoo.com
Date: 12/22/04
- Next message: jackeslenoa_at_yahoo.com: "Vermaas and Dieks - Modal interpretation"
- Previous message: Arnold Neumaier: "Re: When do we need renormalization"
- In reply to: Karl Poessl: "Uniform gravitational Field"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Uniform gravitational Field"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:57:49 +0000 (UTC)
Uncle Al wrote:
> Note that postulating the EP to model gravitation is entirely
> unnecessary. Weitzenboek's affine gravitation (autoparallel paths)
> contains the exact whole of metric gravitation General Relativity
> (geodesic paths) - qualitative and quantitative - down to the last
> decimal place. Affine gravitation is much harder to calculate.
> Affine gravitation is much richer for allowing EP violation in
several
> circumstances.
Where can I read about W's ideas?
-drl
- Next message: jackeslenoa_at_yahoo.com: "Vermaas and Dieks - Modal interpretation"
- Previous message: Arnold Neumaier: "Re: When do we need renormalization"
- In reply to: Karl Poessl: "Uniform gravitational Field"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Uniform gravitational Field"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
