Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: + + + + + + +
Talk:Special theory of relativity (view source)
Revision as of 22:16, November 21, 2018
, 22:16, November 21, 2018→...clear contradictions in [SR]?
Meanwhile, the computer engineer cited has NO experiments. His theory makes NO predictions. His one publication isn't even available anymore. Yet he's cited as just an authoritative a source as 100+ years of science.
Meanwhile, the computer engineer cited has NO experiments. His theory makes NO predictions. His one publication isn't even available anymore. Yet he's cited as just an authoritative a source as 100+ years of science.
:Ok, first of all, you didn't do it. You didn't provide the proof of those challenges by generations of scientists for over 100 years, which are bound to be papers anyway, and not YouTube videos. But, setting that aside, I agree that the article needs some corrections, and preferably based on the following format:
*Introduction of the subject
*Detailed description of ''what it is'', to include the math formulas.
*History, as in who discovered it, who applied it, confirmed it, and so on.
*Specific fields, concepts, and subjects STR has been used to find and confirm.
*Criticisms; did STR fail in any or all predictions? Have to be specific on this one, as STR could work for some things, and not for others.
:You are more than welcome to do it, up to and including the elimination of that computer engineer. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:16, 21 November 2018 (EST)