Re: Leibniz vs Newton


"Michael Hell" <mobydikc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1165665317.682391.27040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <h4adnVGMqYWEBufYRVnyswA@xxxxxxxxx>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I love the crank war cries along the lines education forces people not
to
think and not to challenge the accepted knowledge. It really makes me
laugh,
especially when I think back to conversations I had in university where
_everyone_ is trying to find a flaw in the previous work so they can
make a
name for themselves.

One day, I would love to know where cranks get this common
misconception
from. Is it really because they are stuck in "High School" mode and
think
university is the same but longer?

Oh yes. They seem to understand the concept that the glory is there in
trying to identify a new way to attack difficult issues, but fail to
understand thats what academia is attempting to do. They take their
rejection (on the grounds that their "theories" are idiocy) as a sign
that academics are "surpressing them".

Of course you are also looking for flaws in the theories.

But you're re-examining equations that have been examined a million
times.

Blimey.

Seriously, where have you got these ideas about tertiary education from?

Einstein didn't find a problem in Newton's thinking by looking at the
math.

He did it by imagining pictures.

Ha. Einstien was an excellent mathematician. How do you know he didnt look
at the mathematics? He didnt write GR as a picture book.

Once he was able to see that the problem with Newton's theories had
nothing to do with math, but instead the concepts the math was
attempting to represent, he could adjust the concepts and work out a
new math to sit on top of them.

You are a bit confused about the interaction between the mathematics and the
theory. You really should try getting on a formal course, it would clear up
these misconceptions in no time.

Academia is focused on working out new math for the same concepts, and
discourages frank and open discussion of the concepts themselves.

Incorrect.


.

Quantcast