Dear Greenfield collection
From: Eckard Blumschein (blumschein_at_et.uni-magdeburg.de)
Date: 11/25/04
- Next message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Quantum Gravity Hypothesis"
- Previous message: Chris.B: "Re: Liberals Are Coming *Unglued*!"
- Next in thread: Uncle Al: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Sam Wormley: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Morituri-Max: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Guenther von Knakspott: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:20:00 +0100
I refer to the "Greenfield collection" as to Sam W, uncle Al and all the
other self-entitled Einsteinians who managed to drag away all attention
from my original topic "Is physics really a matter of belief?" and to
pleasure-seeking attack the admittedly somewhat strange views of Jim,
not Edward, Greenfield.
Dear Greenfield collection,
May I ask for a serious discussion of my assertion that, relative to an
observing object, future events do never influence past ones, therefore
future spacetime can only be a matter of belief in extrapolation but it
definitely evades any access, and exclusion of negative elapsed time
would remove apparent symmetry and complex redundancy from physics.
I am convinced that my assertion is correct in ordinary physics. A final
judgement which also includes micro- and macrocosmos is beyond my scope.
Sincerely,
Eckard Blumschein
- Next message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Quantum Gravity Hypothesis"
- Previous message: Chris.B: "Re: Liberals Are Coming *Unglued*!"
- Next in thread: Uncle Al: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Uncle Al: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Sam Wormley: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Morituri-Max: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Reply: Guenther von Knakspott: "Re: Dear Greenfield collection"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]