Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion
From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 01/12/05
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Previous message: Uncle Al: "Re: Son du tonnerre"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Reply: Sam Wormley: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:10:16 GMT
"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:34ktutF4csg5bU1@individual.net...
>
>
> kenseto wrote:
> >
> > Hey idiot...hand waving is not an arguement.
>
> There is not a single aether based theory of gravity which is supported
> by vetted and reproduced experiment. Not one.
My theory is supported by experiments. The equation is a modified Newtomian
equation.
>
> Aether is a looser concept. Physics gets along just fine without it.
No ....Standard Physics failed to account for the following observations:
1. GR failed to predict the correct rotational curves for galaxies.
2. GR failed to predict the accelerated expansion of the universe.
3. GR failed to predict the correct path of travel for Pioneer 10.
Ken Seto
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Previous message: Uncle Al: "Re: Son du tonnerre"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Reply: Sam Wormley: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
