Gravitation is not geometrical
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Do you want to chat with troll Dono about relativity?, try this
Next: The spinor nature of spacetime - Fictitious motion in a Minkowski spacetime
From: Albertito on 28 Nov 2008 14:20 On Nov 28, 7:08 pm, "Juan R." González-Álvarez <juanREM...(a)canonicalscience.com> wrote: > Albertito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:03:38 -0800: > > (snip more misunderstanding) > > --http://www.canonicalscience.org/ what misunderstanding?
From: Albertito on 28 Nov 2008 14:24 On Nov 28, 7:09 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > Albertito wrote: > > On Nov 28, 6:56 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > >> Juan R. González-Álvarez wrote: > >>> Sam Wormley wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:19:55 +0000: > >>>> General Relativity is a theory invented by Albert Einstein > >>> General Relativity is the result of the work of a number of authors. Main > >>> authors were Einstein, Grossman[n], and Hilbert. > >>> Attributing GR to Einstein alone is, of course, historically inacurate. > >> There are many who are not comfortable with non-intuitive aspects > >> of modern physics, such as the quantum mechanics and relativity. > > >> What is important is that the resulting physical theories are very > >> fruitful. Take relativity, for example. Are you aware that there has > >> never been a prediction of relativity that was contradicted by an > >> observation? > > > Yes, I'm aware of that. For example, gravitional waves > > are prediction of relativity. Since, gravitational waves > > will never be observed, its non-observation never will > > contradict relativity! > > Hulse and Taylor Only direct evidence count, indirect evidence does not count, if the scientific method is what you are applying.
From: "Juan R." González-Álvarez on 28 Nov 2008 14:26 Albertito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:20:41 -0800: > On Nov 28, 7:08 pm, "Juan R." González-Álvarez > <juanREM...(a)canonicalscience.com> wrote: >> Albertito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:03:38 -0800: >> >> (snip more misunderstanding) >> >> --http://www.canonicalscience.org/ > > what misunderstanding? *Plural* -- http://www.canonicalscience.org/
From: Albertito on 28 Nov 2008 14:33 On Nov 28, 7:26 pm, "Juan R." González-Álvarez <juanREM...(a)canonicalscience.com> wrote: > Albertito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:20:41 -0800: > > > On Nov 28, 7:08 pm, "Juan R." González-Álvarez > > <juanREM...(a)canonicalscience.com> wrote: > >> Albertito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:03:38 -0800: > > >> (snip more misunderstanding) > > >> --http://www.canonicalscience.org/ > > > what misunderstanding? > > *Plural* > > --http://www.canonicalscience.org/ what misunderstandings?
From: Dono on 28 Nov 2008 14:44
On Nov 28, 11:08 am, "JuanShito R." González-Álvarez <juanREM...(a)canonicalscience.com> wrote: > AlbertShito wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:03:38 -0800: > > (snip more misunderstanding) > > --http://www.canonicalscience.org/ The two Spaniard kooks are fighting again ! |