|
A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eugene Shubert the new William Miller

Joined: 06 Apr 2002 Posts: 1006 Location: Richardson Texas
|
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:50 pm Post subject: Is a Crystal-clear Theory Preferable to Dogmatic Riddles? |
|
|
Everyone understands that special relativity has a certain domain of applicability. In that domain, there is an enormous array of physical phenomena that can be admirably accounted for and explained by a single thesis. But what if the postulates of that thesis are conceptually perplexing, disturbing and mysteriously elusive abstractions that can be replaced by a simpler and more intuitive axiom set? In that instance, shouldn't we welcome the better, more fundamental explanation and think about retiring the traditional, cumbersome, archaic approach to its rightful place in the museum of the history of physics?
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eugene Shubert the new William Miller

Joined: 06 Apr 2002 Posts: 1006 Location: Richardson Texas
|
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jim Pennino wrote: | | "conceptually perplexing, disturbing and mysteriously elusive abstractions" to who? |
I like to explain Einstein's theory of Relativity in the most illuminating, common sense manner possible. Most experts are satisfied with being vague and obscure. There is a reason for this. There are two opposing forces in the universe. One power likes to obfuscate and perplex. The other enlightens.
Isn't it an axiom in science that simple, streamlined explanations are to be preferred above inelegant, dogmatic, church sanctioned riddles?
| Jim Pennino wrote: | | If it is just the crackpots and uneducated that babble on here all the time [the newsgroup sci.physics.relativity], I'm not concerned. |
Let's ignore the many crackpots and uneducated rabble around here and treat them as ignorant knuckleheads who have been duped into believing that the theory of relativity can be understood without math. Just so there's no real doubt, I'm targeting my challenge to the eggheads and popularizers of modern physics who have been teaching these fools everything that they know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eugene Shubert the new William Miller

Joined: 06 Apr 2002 Posts: 1006 Location: Richardson Texas
|
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:09 pm Post subject: Uncle Al |
|
|
| Uncle Al wrote: | Eugene Shubert wrote:
>
> Everyone understands that special relativity has a certain domain of applicability.
[snip]
Idiot.
> But what if the postulates of that thesis are conceptually perplexing, disturbing and mysteriously elusive abstractions that can be replaced by a simpler and more intuitive axiom set?
Told ya.
[snip crap]
Hey stooopid, what is perplexing about
1) Lorentz Invariance, and
2) Lightspeed is identical for all inertial observers
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
No aether
Idiot.
--
Uncle Al |
Uncle Al:
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|