FR Bending of Light -- Proof
in [Physics]
|
From: PD on 22 Jan 2010 16:32 On Jan 22, 12:46 pm, Phil Bouchard <p...(a)fornux.com> wrote: > PD wrote: > > > One doesn't owe a disproving to nonsense. FR has to compete with > > prevailing theories on the metrics that theories are measured by. If > > yours doesn't compete, it doesn't. It isn't owed a disproof. > > $1,000,000 You don't have $1,000,000. > > > One can't disprove God, either. That doesn't make God a viable > > scientific theory. > > Great analogy but I think common sense should be the ultimate decider. And that's your mistake. A lot of cranks and goofballs here think that relativity and quantum mechanics MUST be wrong because they are in conflict with their common sense. Common sense does not decide, never has, never should. You do know how models ARE tested in science, don't you?
From: PD on 22 Jan 2010 16:32 On Jan 22, 12:36 pm, Phil Bouchard <p...(a)fornux.com> wrote: > J. Clarke wrote: > > > And since it contains no means by which it may be falsified, it is not > > science. > > Epic fail. > > "If it's not broken don't fix it!" -- Relativists It's certainly not broken, that's right.
From: eric gisse on 22 Jan 2010 16:39 Phil Bouchard wrote: > PD wrote: >> >> One doesn't owe a disproving to nonsense. FR has to compete with >> prevailing theories on the metrics that theories are measured by. If >> yours doesn't compete, it doesn't. It isn't owed a disproof. > > $1,000,000 Really, Phil? Show us a bank statement. > >> One can't disprove God, either. That doesn't make God a viable >> scientific theory. > > Great analogy but I think common sense should be the ultimate decider.
From: Phil Bouchard on 22 Jan 2010 17:33 PD wrote: [...] > And that's your mistake. A lot of cranks and goofballs here think that > relativity and quantum mechanics MUST be wrong because they are in > conflict with their common sense. Common sense does not decide, never > has, never should. You do know how models ARE tested in science, don't > you? Excuses not to work like everybody else...
From: Phil Bouchard on 22 Jan 2010 17:41
eric gisse wrote: [...] >> This is not serious, seriously. So we fall back to that spacetime warp >> deadlocked logic. > > So Phil, do you even have enough knowledge of electromagnetic theory to > understand the paper you just dismissed out of hand? Relativity did not have > to be invoked once to explain the phenomena. > > If not, why are you talking about articles you do not understand? The *time* is warped: "This phenomenon is caused by an interplay between the time scales present in the pulse and the time scales present in the medium." Doug really stuffed you with overconfidence... |