Re: A new theory with two postulates


SCW wrote:
PD wrote:

SCW wrote:
Mike wrote:

SCW wrote:
Here's an opening gambit. I have made two assumptions

1) No theory is infallible.

2) The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is
required to support it against agreed weaknesses.

Any thoughts or comments?

Of course. According to your postulates, your theory is also falllible.

Mike



.

SCW

Well, there isn't much theory there to be honest, but yes, that's true
- it could be replace by a better theory.

It's more a jibe at SR, which seems to be painting itself into a
corner.


What corner would that be?

PD

The conceptual one over there, containing the socially awkward males
with body odour and no women.


Excuse me while I go locate my wife at the other end of the party and
ask her if she knows what corner you're talking about.

PD

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A new theory with two postulates
    ... SCW wrote: ... The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is ... required to support it against agreed weaknesses. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: A new theory with two postulates
    ... SCW wrote: ... The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is ... required to support it against agreed weaknesses. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: A new theory with two postulates
    ... SCW wrote: ... The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is ... required to support it against agreed weaknesses. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: A new theory with two postulates
    ... The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is ... required to support it against agreed weaknesses. ... containing the socially awkward males ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: A new theory with two postulates
    ... SCW wrote: ... The demise of any theory is close at hand when additional theory is ... required to support it against agreed weaknesses. ...
    (sci.physics)